THE 

UNITARIAN 
CHURCH 

Its  History  and  Characteristics 
A  STATEMENT 


BY 


Rev.  Joseph   Henry   Crooker,  D.D. 


•^3,01 


1b>^  uuiMr'pr'mM    m    t  <*i 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


'^. 


Section  ■ 


THE  / 


W^nituxiun  €'b\ivt'b 


A    STATEMENT 


BY 

REV.   JOSEPH    HENRY   CROOKER,  D.D. 


These  churches  accept  the  religion  of  Jesus,  holding, 
in  accordance  with  his  teaching,  that  practical  religion  is 
summed  up  in  love  to  God  and  love  to  man. 

Adopted  by  National  Co7iference^  1894. 


AMERICAN  UNITARIAN   ASSOCIATION 
Boston,  Mass. 


l: 


John  Wilson  and  Son,  Cambridge,  U.  S.  A. 


INTRODUCTION 

The  purpose  of  this  pamphlet  is  to  give  briefly  and 
clearly  certain  information  about  the  Unitarian  Church ; 
its  history,  its  characteristic  convictions,  its  achieve- 
ments, its  hopes.  In  preparing  it,  the  author  has  had 
in  mind  the  needs  of  inquirers  who  have  come  to  him 
in  the  course  of  a  fruitful  ministry  seeking  the  infor- 
mation which  is  here  set  down.  Dr.  Crooker  has  had 
the  privilege  of  serving  two  churches  situated  at  the 
seats  of  two  great  state  universities,  —  the  University 
of  Wisconsin  at  Madison,  and  the  University  of  Michi- 
gan at  Ann  Arbor.  In  these  academic  communities  he 
has  won  the  confidence  and  lasting  affection  of  a  large 
number  of  young  men  and  women  who  have  become 
and  are  to  become  influential  members  of  the  communi- 
ties in  which  they  live.  He  writes  this  statement  out  of 
this  unique  and  happy  experience. 

The  statement  does  not  represent  a  narrow  sectarian 
view  or  a  boastful  spirit.  With  all  his  fellow  citizens  in 
this  free  household  of  faith.  Dr.  Crooker  recognizes  that 
Unitarianism  is  not  now,  and  probably  never  will  be,  the 
one  universal  religion.  It  is  rather  a  particular  form  of 
the  religious  life.  It  is  not  so  much  a  system  of  thought 
as  it  is  a  habit  of  mind  and  a  principle  of  conduct.    The. 


IV 

representative  expression  of  this  habit  of  mind  is  to  be 
found  in  the  constant  witness  borne  to  the  present  life 
of  God  in  the  present  life  of  man.  Every  true  Unitarian 
seeks  to  cultivate  the  religious  spirit  that  includes  all 
truth,  and  the  religious  sentiment  that  embraces  all  men. 
Therefore  Dr.  Crooker's  aim  has  been  to  afifirm  the  great 
spiritual  ideals  of  the  human  soul.  He  has  been  more 
intent  on  winning  the  doubtful,  relieving  the  distressed, 
and  inspiring  the  indifferent  in  matters  pertaining  to 
religion,  than  on  criticising  creeds,  or  controverting  out- 
grown dogmas.  He  has  written  in  warm  appreciation  of 
all  forms  of  sincere  piety,  and  has  endeavored  to  speak 
the  truth  in  love. 

The  mission  of  Unitarian  teaching  and  work  is  "  not 
to  destroy  but  to  fulfil."  Its  purpose  is  not  to  antag- 
onize other  forms  of  faith,  but  to  satisfy  some  of  the 
longings  which  those  other  forms  of  faith  express ;  to 
discover  and  emphasize  the  permanent  and  universal 
elements  of  religious  thought  and  life,  and  lead  such 
powers  on  to  nobler  employment.  It  preserves  the  his- 
toric continuity  of  the  progressive  spiritual  life  of  the 
Christian  centuries.  What  Dr.  Crooker  has  written  is 
heartily  commended  to  all  who  wish  to  know  something 
of  the  nature  of  the  religious  movement  which  seeks 
thus  to  re-affirm  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ,  holding,  in 
accordance  with  his  teaching,  that  practical  religion  is 
summed  up  in  love  to  God  and  love  to  man. 

SAMUEL  A.  ELIOT. 


The   Unitarian  Church: 

ITS 

« 

HISTORY   AND    CHARACTERISTICS 

I.     HISTORY 

I  The  Unitarian  Gospel  began  with  the  discovery 

Beginnuigs       ^^^^^  we  live  in  a  Universe.     Its  original  affirmation 
was  the  unity  of  God.     The  great  teachings  of  science  respect- 
ing the  unity  of  energy,  the  unity  of  life,  the  unity  of  humanity, 
are  confirmations  of  that  early  conviction. 
n  The  prophetic  writings,  such   as  those  by  Amos, 

Hebrew  Hosea,  Micah,  and  Isaiah,  represent  the  spiritual 

Prophets 

and  enduring  elements  in  the  Old  Testament.     In 

their  protest  against  sacrifice,  idolatry,  formalism,  injustice, 
and  selfishness,  and  in  their  teaching  of  the  unity,  holiness, 
and  goodness  of  God,  they  set  forth  what  are  now  the  essen- 
tial Unitarian  principles.  Their  plea  that  righteousness  is  what 
God  demands  and  what  man  needs,  —  that  righteousness  is 
blessedness,  —  is  our  plea. 

m  We  claim  to  teach  what  was  central  and  essential 

Jesus  lj^  ^^  message  of  Jesus.     We  lay  our  emphasis  on 

the  Beatitudes,  the  Golden  Rule,  the  Law  of  Love  (Matt. 
xxii.  34—40).  We  find  the  way  of  salvation  described  in 
his  parables,  where  purity  is  set  forth  as  the  condition,  growth 
the  method,  love  the  motive,  character  the  fruitage,  and 
service  the  expression  of  Eternal  Life,  or  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. 

IV  We   do   not  appeal   to  the  New  Testament  as  a 

***^  document  of  final  and  infallible  authority,  and  we 

do  not   claim  that  the   Unitarian  Gospel   is   merely  an  echo 


of  apostolic  Christianity.  But  we  do  claim  to  represent  its 
spirit  and  ideal.  When  Peter  declared,  "  Of  a  truth,  I  per- 
ceive that  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  but  in  every  nation 
he  that  feareth  him  and  worketh  righteousness  is  accepted 
with  him,"  he  proclaimed  the  Unitarian  faith.  When  he 
described  the  ministry  of  Jesus  to  consist  in  "  turning  every 
one  of  you  from  his  iniquities,"  he  spoke  like  a  Unitarian.  See 
Acts  iii.  26 ;  x.  34,  35. 

When  Paul  preached,  "  In  God  we  live  and  move  and  have 
our  being,"  and  when  he  wrote,  "  And  now  abideth  faith,  hope, 
love,  these  three  ;  and  the  greatest  of  these  is  love,"  he  stood 
on  ground  now  occupied  by  Unitarians.  See  Acts  xvii.  28; 
I  Cor.  xiii.  13. 

And  when  it  was  written  by  John  or  in  the  name  of  John, 
"  Let  us  love  one  another,  for  love  is  of  God ;  and  every  one 
that  loveth  is  born  of  God,  and  knoweth  God  "  (i  John  iv.  7)^ 
the  writer  defined  the  Unitarian  position.  There  are  other 
things  in  the  New  Testament,  but  these  teachings  made  the 
glory  and  strength  of  early  Christianity,  and  they  are  the 
things  that  are  eternal  and  that  we  lay  to  heart. 
V  In   the  primitive   churches   there   were  beliefs  in 

Early  Church  j-ggpect  to  the  messiahship  and  second  coming 
of  Jesus,  superstitions  respecting  baptism,  and  uses  of  the  Old 
Testament,  which  are  no  part  of  our  religion.  But  it  is 
generally  conceded  by  modern  scholars  that  the  original  Chris- 
tianity was  not  the  acceptance  of  a  creed  but  the  adoption  of 
a  spirit  like  that  of  Jesus,  and  that  the  early  churches  were 
democratic  in  form,  each  independent,  with  no  elaborate 
ceremonials  and  no  radical  distinctions  between  clergy  and 
laity. 

Great  scholars  representing  many  different  denominations 
agree  to-day  that  the  deification  of  Jesus,  as  found  in  the 
Nicene  and  trinitarian  creeds,  has  no  adequate  warrant  in 
Scripture,  and  does  not  represent  the  original  faith,  but  that  it 
was  a  slowly  developed  philosophical  afterthought,  which  was 


looted,  not  in  the  words  of  Jesus  or  the  beliefs  of  his  disciples, 
but  in  the  mystical  speculations  of  Alexandria. 

It  is  also  admitted  that  the  so-called  "  Apostles'  Creed  " 
does  not  accurately  report  the  ideas  of  primitive  Christianity. 
It  was  not  set  forth  by  the  Apostles  themselves,  but  was  slowly 
evolved  under  the  stress  of  many  controversies,  and  reached 
its  present  shape  after  the  fourth  century. 

No  modern  church  exactly  reproduces  the  original  Chris- 
tian faith,  polity,  or  ritual  (it  is  not  necessary  that  they  should 
be  reproduced)  ;  but  what  we  claim  is,  (i)  That  many  of 
the  dogmas  made  prominent  in  the  creeds  of  Christendom 
nave  no  warrant  in  the  teachings  of  Jesus;  (2)  That  the 
spiritual  and  eternal  elements  of  primitive  Christianity  are 
affirmed  by  Unitarians.  Confirmation  of  these  statements 
may  be  easily  found  in  the  oldest  church  manual  in  existence, 
"The  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles  '^  (distributed/zr*?  in  an 
English  translation  by  the  American  Unitarian  Association), 
or  in  the  two  works  by  the  great  Oxford  scholar.  Rev.  Dr. 
Edwin  Hatch  (Episcopal),  "  Organization  of  the  Early  Chris- 
tian Churches  "  and  "  Influence  of  Greek  Ideas  and  Usages." 
VI  At  the  first  general  council  at  Nicaea  in  325,  Arius 

^"^^  denied  the  doctrine   that  was   finally  adopted  — 

the  Nicene  Creed  (forced  through  by  the  imperial  pressure  of 
Constantine)  —  that  Jesus,  the  Son  or  Logos,  is  "  very  God  of 
very  God  "  (same  substance  —  hofnoousion) ^  and  he  asserted 
that  Jesus  was  a  being  more  than  man,  but  separate  from 
God,  of  similar  but  not  identical  substance  {Jwinoiousion) ,  not 
begotten  from  eternity  but  created  in  time.  This  Arian  view 
of  Jesus  as  a  separate  and  subordinate  being  has  been  widely 
held  by  the  forerunners  of  modern  Unitarians.  The  fact  that 
Arius  could  truthfully  appeal  to  Scripture  and  tradition 
against  his  opponent  Athanasius  shows  that  a  belief  similar  to 
this  had  been  the  ancient  and  common  view. 

The  Arians  were  at  times  very  numerous,  and  they  were 
often  active  in  good  works.     Witness  the  missionary  labors  of 


8 

Ulfilas  among  the  Goths  (died  383).  But  Arianism  was  net 
a  successful  solution  of  the  problem  respecting  Jesus'  nature 
and  rank.  It  neither  saved  the  pure  humanity  of  Jesus  nor 
brought  mankind  into  immediate  contact  with  the  infinite  God 
our  Father,  while  it  subjected  the  Arians  to  the  charge  of  wor- 
shipping a  creature^  —  an  intolerable  situation.  Unitarians  a 
century  ago  largely  held  Arian  views ;  fifty  years  ago  this  posi- 
tion had  been  generally  abandoned.  It  is  now  held  by  few, 
if  any. 

vn  Many  early  Protestants  approximated  the  Unitarian 

Reformation  position,  and  four  great  men  among  the  reformers 
of  the  sixteenth  century  set  in  operation  forces  in  the  reli- 
gious world  that  resulted  in  a  liberal  form  of  Christianity. 
In  1553  Servetus  (a  fugitive  from  Spain,  his  native  land: 
burned  at  the  stake  in  Geneva,  1553,  Calvin  consenting)  pub- 
lished his  "  Restoration  of  Christianity,"  a  plea  for  a  simplifi- 
cation of  the  Christian  faith.  It  was  not  a  profound  work, 
but  it  provoked  discussion  and  stimulated  more  rational 
thinking.  Faustus  Socinus  labored  in  the  same  general  direc- 
tion—  a  disciple  of  Laelius  Socinus,  his  uncle  (both  Italians). 
He  spread  his  views  widely  in  Poland  (15 75-1604),  where 
they  flourished  for  about  a  century,  but  were  finally  stamped 
out  with  great  cruelty.  About  1560,  Francis  David  estab- 
lished even  more  radical  doctrines,  in  Transylvania,  where 
the  movement  which  he  inaugurated  still  survives.  His  disci- 
ple, John  Sigismund,  gave  the  people  a  charter  of  religious 
liberty  (1568) — one  of  the  first  and  greatest  documents  of 
religious  freedom. 

The  prominence  of  Laelius  and  Faustus  Socinus  in  this 
movement  for  a  more  rational  interpretation  of  Christianity 
gave  the  name  Socinian  to  those  who  denied  the  absolute  deity 
of  Jesus  and  the  total  depravity  of  man,  and  affirmed  the 
unity  of  God  and  a  spiritual,  rather  than  a  sacrificial,  interpre- 
tation of  Jesus.  The  name,  however,  has  long  since  ceased 
adequately  to  describe  Unitarians. 


Arius,  Servetus,  and  Socinus  had  this  in  common,  —  they 
denied  the  dogma  of  the  Trinity.  But  we  must  note  these 
differences  :  Arius  dealt  only  with  the  rank  and  nature  of 
Jesus,  making  him  an  intermediate  being  between  God  and 
man.  Ser\'etus  was  a  free  lance,  somewhat  erratic  and  wholly 
critical.  He  made  Jesus  not  so  much  a  separate  being  as  a 
peculiar  manifestation  of  God.  Socinus  effected  a  more  posi- 
tive and  comprehensive  reconstruction  of  Christianity.  He 
was  more  humanitarian  in  his  view  of  Jesus  than  the  others, 
looking  upon  him,  not  so  much  as  a  unique  being,  as  a 
"  divine  man."  He  also  denied  total  depravity,  vicarious 
atonement,  and  endless  punishment. 

vm  By  1600  these  liberal  views  began  to  take  hold  of 

England  some  thoughtful  minds  in  England.     Some  Eng- 

lish Liberals  were,  however,  Arians  rather  than  Socinians.  But 
anything  like  a  popular  movement  in  this  line  was  made  impos- 
sible by  cruel  measures  of  repression.  Unitarian  literature 
was  burnt,  and  denial  of  the  Trinity  was  made  punishable  by 
death.  In  1662,  John  Biddle  died  in  prison  from  starvation 
under  charge  of  teaching  against  the  trinitarian  doctrine.  The 
last  heretics  to  die  as  martyrs  in  Great  Britain  were  Unitarians. 
Unitarians  were  not  properly  recognized  by  law  in  England 
until  the  year  181 3,  when  the  penalties  attaching  to  disbelief 
in  the  Trinity  were  abolished.  And  yet,  three  of  the  greatest 
Englishmen  of  the  seventeenth  century  were  Unitarians  of  the 
Arian  type  —  John  Milton,  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  and  John  Locke. 

During  the  eighteenth  century,  there  was  a  broadening  of 
religious  thought  among  certain  Presbyterian  churches  in 
England,  —  those  whose  chapels  were  held  on  *'  open  trusts," 
not  tied  to  a  fixed  creed,  like  the  Presbyterian  churches 
in  Scotland ;  and  by  the  middle  of  the  century  some  of 
them  had  come  to  be  Unitarian  in  belief.  Joseph  Priestley 
(Socinian  rather  than  Arian),  the  discoverer  of  oxygen,  was 
minister  of  one  of  these  churches  in  Birmingham  (1780).  His 
work  on  the  "  Corruptions  of  Christianity"  (1782)  exerted  a 


lO 


wide  influence.  In  1774,  Rev.  Theophilus  Lindsey  (formerly 
an  Episcopal  clergyman)  established  a  Unitarian  chapel  in 
London  (where  the  Unitarian  Headquarters  are  now  lo- 
cated—  Essex  Hall).  To  this  nucleus  slowly  gravitated 
many  of  these  Presbyterian  and  other  progressive  churches. 

The  movement  now  had  a  centre  and  a  name.  The 
British  and  Foreign  Unitarian  Association  was  organized  in 
1825.  In  connection  with  this  movement  during  the  past 
century,  small  in  numbers  and  cramped  by  many  forms  of  in- 
tolerance and  persecution,  we  find  the  names  of  such  hymn 
writers  as  Sir  John  Bowring  ("  In  the  Cross  of  Christ  I  Glory  ") 
and  Sarah  Flower  x\dams  ("  Nearer,  my  God,  to  Thee  ")  ;  such 
leaders  among  women  as  Frances  Power  Cobbe,  Florence 
Nightingale,  Mary  Somerville,  and  Mary  Carpenter;  such 
scientists  and  scholars  as  Sir  Charles  Lyell,  Dr.  William  B. 
Carpenter,  Francis  W.  Newman,  Samuel  Davidson,  Stopford 
A.  Brooke,  and  James  Martineau,  —  a  group  of  immortals  out 
of  all  proportion  to  the  size  of  this  religious  body  ! 
jx  The  seeds  of  Unitarianism  were  brought  over  to 

America  America  in    the    Mayflower.     They  were    planted 

wherever  a  church  was  organized  in  New  England  with  a 
covenant  instead  of  a  creed.  The  successive  steps  of  growth 
are  indicated  by  the  following  names  and  dates : 

In  1 715  Rev.  John  Wise,  of  Ipswich,  Mass.,  the  father  of 
American  Democracy,  published  a  powerful  and  popular  book, 
"  Government  of  the  New  England  Churches,"  which  was  a 
stirring  plea  for  democracy,  progress,  and  reason  in  religion. 
It  insisted  on  the  absolute  independence  of  the  local  church,  — 
a  pure  Congregational  Polity,  in  contrast  with  Presbyterian  and 
Episcopal  hierarchies.  It  effectually  kept  the  door  open  for 
growth  and  progress.  This  made  it  possible  for  Rev.  Dr. 
Ebenezer  Gay,  ordained  pastor  of  the  First  Parish  in  Hing- 
ham,  Mass.,  171 7,  to  advance  to  a  Liberal  Theology  a  few 
years  later  and  still  keep  his  pulpit.  Others  advanced  along 
the  same  line. 


I  1 


About  1 740  Rev.  Dr.  Charles  Chauncy,  minister  of  the 
First  Church,  Boston,  led  the  broadening  religious  thought  of 
the  time  in  a  work,  "Seasonable  Thoughts,"  directed  against 
Jonathan  Edwards  and  the  revivals  of  the  day.  Later  (17S4) 
he  published  a  notable  book,  "Salvation  of  All  Men,"  one  of  the 
most  forcible  affirmations  of  the  "  Largest  Hope  "  ever  printed. 

Soon  after  the  close  of  the  Revolution  many  ministers  of 
the  old  First  Parishes  (Congregational  churches)  in  Eastern 
Massachusetts  had  come  by  quiet  growth  to  occupy  Unitarian 
ground.  They  had  abandoned  the  Trinity  for  the  Fatherhood 
of  God,  total  depravity  for  the  native  capacity  of  man,  the 
teaching  of  dogma  for  emphasis  on  righteousness,  the  deity  of 
Christ  for  the  divinity  of  Jesus ;  and,  using  the  Bible  more 
rationally  and  spiritually,  they  rescued  the  humanity  of  Jesus 
from  neglect,  interpreted  religion  as  the  spirit  of  a  noble  life, 
and  advocated  freedom  and  growth.  L^nitarianism  was  now 
in  the  air,  partly  as  the  result  of  the  liberal  thought  imported 
from  England  and  France,  partly  as  the  product  of  the  culture 
of  Harvard  College,  but  chiefly  as  the  natural  outcome  of  the 
principles  inherent  in  New  England  Puritanism. 

The  first  overt  act  was,  however,  the  ordination  of  James 
Freeman,  a  decided  Unitarian,  as  rector  of  King's  Chapel, 
Boston  (1787), — the  first  Episcopal  church  established  in 
New  England.  The  ritual  of  the  church  was  modified  by  the 
excision  of  Orthodox  phrases  and  the  parish  became  Congre- 
gational or  independent.  In  1796,  in  Philadelphia,  under  the 
influence  of  Priestley,  who  had  fled  to  America  to  escape  vio- 
lent persecution,  a  distinctly  Unitarian  church  was  established. 
When  Henry  Ware,  known  to  be  a  decided  Liberal,  was 
appointed  (1805)  professor  of  divinity  at  Harvard,  the  separa- 
tion among  the  New  England  churches  and  ministers  began  in 
earnest.  Two  parties,  Orthodox  and  Unitarian,  were  soon 
arrayed  against  each  other  in  theological  debate.  In  the  score 
of  years  following,  nearly  all  the  old  churches  in  Boston  and 
many  of  the  First  Parishes  in  that  vicinity  became  Unitarian  in 


12 


theology,  but  without  changing  their  name  or  organization  ;  and 
they  remain  to  this  day  the  leaders  in  all  Unitarian  activities. 
During  these  years  a  great  teacher  came  forth,  Rev.  Dr.  William 
Ellery  Channing  (17S0-1842),  minister  of  the  Federal  Street 
Church  (now  Arlington  Street),  Boston;  and  his  sermon  at  Bal- 
timore in  1 81 9,  at  the  ordination  of  Jared  Sparks,  became  the 
Unitarian  Declaration  of  Independence.  In  1825  followed  at 
Boston  the  organization  of  the  American  Unitarian  Association. 
X  At  the  present  date   there  are  in  America  about 

Present  ^^^^  hundred  and  fifty  Unitarian  churches,  a  maior- 

Churches  ity  being  east  of  the  Hudson  river,  and  many  of 
these  latter  being  the  original  churches  of  the  early  settlers, 
like  those  at  Plymouth,  Salem,  Boston,  Watertown,  and 
Cambridge.  In  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  there  are  about 
four  hundred  churches  in  the  Unitarian  fellowship,  with  various 
names  —  Presbyterian,  Free  Christian,  General  Baptist,  Non- 
subscribing  as  well  as  Unitarian.  In  Transylvania,  with 
Kolozsvar  as  a  centre,  there  are  some  one  hundred  and 
twenty-five  Unitarian  congregations. 

^  There  are  many  religious  bodies  in  general  sym- 

Similar  pathy  with  the  Unitarians  who  do  not  take  our 

Movements  n^me.  The  Universalist  churches  in  America  are 
almost  identical  with  the  Unitarian  in  religious  position  and 
theological  teaching.  The  Hicksite  Quakers  and  Progressive 
Friends,  carrying  out  the  spirit  of  William  Penn  (who  forcibly 
opposed  trinitarian  and  dogmatic  Christianity  in  "  Sandy 
Foundation  Shaken,"  1668)  are  in  general  harmony  with  the 
best  Unitarian  thought.  The  Liberal  Protestants  in  France 
and  Switzerland  have  practically  the  same  beliefs.  In  Ger- 
many there  are  many  Liberals  among  Lutherans  and  Evangeli- 
cals, associated  in  the  Protestanten  Verein,  who  are  in  general 
agreement  with  Unitarian  views.  The  progressive  movement 
among  the  Jews,  Reformed  Judaism,  is  in  substantial  accord 
with  the  Unitarian  spirit.  Tliere  is  a  large  and  influential 
party  in  Holland,  with  the  University  of  Leiden  as  its  centre 


^3 

of  culture,  which  is  Unitarian  in  everything  but  name.  The 
Brahmo  Soma]  of  India,  a  noble  band  of  Theists  who  represent 
the  advance  guard  of  religious  progress  in  that  land,  are  in 
closest  fellowship  with  English  and  American  Unitarians. 

It  would  be  easy  to  make  a  long  list  of  eminent 
Friends  men  and  women  from  all  parts  of  the  world  who 

Without  have    shown   great    appreciation  of  the  Unitarian 

movement  or  who  have  occupied  a  similar  position. 
Dean  Stanley,  of  Westminster,  wrote  some  twenty  years  ago  : 
"  The  Unitarian  church,  including  within  itself  almost  all  the 
cultured  scholarship  of  America  in  the  beginning  of  this 
century,  was  unquestionably  at  the  summit  of  the  civilized 
Christianity  of  the  western  continent." 

The  great  Spanish  reformer  and  statesman,  Castelar,  made 
this  declaration  :  "  The  simple  religion  of  the  future  will  be 
a  religion  whose  dogmas  are  summed  up  in  the  two  funda- 
mental ones  of  the  existence  of  God  and  the  immortality  of 
the  soul,  completed  by  the  purest  morality,  which  breathes 
forth  a  disinterested  love  of  goodness  for  its  own  sake,"  — 
precisely  the  spirit  and  ideal  of  Unitarians. 

Louis  Kossuth,  the  Hungarian  patriot,  used  these  words  to 
Professor  Kovacs,  his  fellow-countryman,  a  Unitarian  :  "  I  rejoice 
over  your  connection  with  the  English  and  American  Unita- 
rians. Spread  their  ideas  and  faith  as  widely  as  you  can  in 
Hungary.  Their  faith  is  the  only  faith  which  has  a  future ; 
the  only  one  that  can  influence  the  intelligent  and  interest 
the  indifferent." 

Prof.  David  Swing  represented  a  large  multitude  who  have 
never  taken  our  name  but  who  share  our  general  views  of 
religion  and  life.  His  own  words  were  just  what  are  preached 
from  every  Unitarian  pulpit :  "  From  such  a  dark  estimate  of 
God  and  Christ  as  this  old  notion  [of  Calvinism]  involves,  it 
is  sweet  to  return  to  the  thought  that  the  law  of  salvation  by 
morality  is  not  a  lottery,  but,  like  the  law  of  industry,  it  lies 
open  for  all." 


14 

The  interpretations  of  life  and  religion  set  forth  in  the  great 
works  of  fiction  by  George  Eliot  and  Mrs.  Humphry  Ward  — 
the  greatest  novelists  among  women  —  are  essentially  Unitarian. 
Both  of  these  distinguished  authors  have  been  very  closely 
associated  with  the  Unitarians.  Many  eminent  clergymen  in 
Scotland,  nominally  Presbyterian,  practically  occupy  our  ground, 
—  such  men  as  Rev.  Dr.  George  Macdonald  in  his  stories,  Rev. 
Dr.  Robert  H.  Story  in  his  sermons,  and  Rev.  Dr.  Walter  C. 
Smith  in  his  poems.  Two  of  the  greatest  literary  influences 
during  the  last  century  among  English-speaking  peoples  were 
Thomas  Carlyle  and  Matthew  Arnold  ;  and  both,  while  they 
cannot  be  called  Unitarians,  were,  in  the  essence  of  their 
messages,  really  pleading  for  the  things  central  in  our  Gospel. 
Three  of  the  men  who,  in  various  ways,  have  most  adorned 
and  enriched  the  life  of  the  Orient  in  recent  years  have  been 
our  approving  friends,  —  Ram  Mohun  Roy,  founder  of  the 
Brahmo  Somaj,  Sir  Jamsetjee  Jejeebhoy,  the  celebrated  Parsee 
philanthropist,  and  Yukichi  Fukuzawa,  "  the  grand  old  man  '* 
of  Japan. 

The  four  men,  all  profoundly  religious,  who  were  the  great- 
est interpreters  of  human  life  among  our  poets  during  the 
nineteenth  century  were  in  general  harmony  with  our  spiritual 
ideals,  —  in  fact,  their  words  have  contributed  to  the  making 
of  modern  Unitarianism,  —  Goethe  and  Victor  Hugo,  Browning 
and  Tennyson.  We  would  not  try  to  narrow  these  great 
geniuses  to  any  sectarian  position ;  but  we  do  claim  that  the 
great  essentials  in  their  messages  are  the  things  that  we 
emphasize. 

Count  Tolstoi,  the  greatest  living  literary  genius  at  the 
present  time,  has  recently  given  expression  to  the  follow- 
ing views:  "It  is  true  I  deny  an  incomprehensible  Trinity 
and  the  fable  regarding  the  f^ill  of  man,  which  is  absurd  in  our 
day.  It  is  true  I  deny  the  sacrilegious  story  of  a  god  born  of 
a  virgin  to  redeem  the  human  race.  But  God-Spirit,  God- 
Love,  God  the  sole  principle  of  all  things,  I  do  not    deny. 


15 

I  believe  in  eternal  life,  and  I  believe  that  man  is  rewarded 
according  to  his  deeds  here  and  everywhere,  now  and  forever. 
I  believe  that  the  will  of  God  was  never  so  clearly,  so  precisely 
explained  as  in  the  doctrine  of  the  man  Christ.  But  one  can- 
not regard  Christ  as  God,  and  offer  prayers  to  him,  without 
committing  the  greatest  sacrilege."  This  is  really  a  summary 
of  the  Unitarian  faith. 

II.     CHARACTERISTICS 

I.    Covenants  not  Creeds 

■Unitarians  in  America  use  as  the  basis  of  their  churches  a 
covefiant,  the  declaration  of  a  spiritual  purpose,  or  a  life 
promise.  Their  bond  of  union  is  not  a  creed,  —  a  set  of 
beliefs,  —  but  a  statement  of  religious  motives.  In  this  they 
follow  the  early  Congregational  Polity,  or  method  of  church 
organization,  which  was  formulated  by  Robert  Browne  in 
England,  late  in  the  sixteenth  century,  adopted  by  the  English 
Independents,  brought  over  to  this  country  by  the  Pilgrims, 
and  used  by  the  original  churches  in  New  England.  The 
covenant  of  the  Pilgrim  church  at  Plymouth  (adopted  in  1602 
before  leaving  England  for  Holland)  is  substantially  as  follows  : 

"We,  the  Lord's  free  people,  join  ourselves  by  a  covenant  of  the 
Lord,  into  a  church  estate  in  the  fellowship  of  the  Gospel,  to  walk 
in  all  his  ways,  made  known  or  to  be  made  known  unto  us,  accord- 
ing to  our  best  endeavors." 

That  of  the  church  in  Salem,  Massachuetts,  the  first  Protestant 
church  organized  in  America  (1629),  is  similar  :  — 

"We  covenant  with  the  Lord,  and  one  with  another,  and  we 
do  bind  ourselves  in  the  presence  of  God  to  walk  together  in  all 
his  ways  according  as  he  is  pleased  to  reveal  himself  unto  us  in  his 
blessed  word  of  truth." 

Several  very  important  facts  are  evident  at  a  glance : 
(i)  Though  these  people  were  Calvinists,  they  did  not  make 


i6 

their  Calvinistic  beliefs  the  basis  of  their  church  organization 
or  the  test  of  their  Christian  fellowship.  (2)  This  is  not  a 
promise  to  beheve  alike,  but  a  promise  to  help  one  another  to 
live  better ;  "  to  walk  together/'  not  to  think  alike,  —  a  simple 
and  spiritual  cove?ia?if,  not  a  creed;  an  aspiration  of  the  soul, 
not  a  theological  confession.  (3)  These  men  of  sturdy  faith 
/eff  the  door  open  for  progress.  The  anticipation  of  growth, 
and  the  expectation  of  larger  wisdom,  speak  in  every  phrase  of 
tYiese  covenants.  Here  we  find  the  guarantee  of  liberty  and 
the  pledge  of  growth. 

In  after  years,  dogmatic  and  reactionary  leaders  in  many 
New  England  churches  overlaid  these  covenants  with  elaborate 
creeds.  But  on  the  rise  of  Unitarianism,  nearly  a  century  ago, 
those  creeds  were  abandoned  by  these  liberal  churches  and 
emphasis  was  laid  once  more  upon  the  original  covenants. 
The  Plymouth  and  Salem  churches,  and  many  others,  which 
have  long  been  Unitarian  in  thought  and  fellowship,  still  have 
their  original  organization  with  the  first  covenants  unchanged. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  two  of  the  most  significant 
events  in  religious  affairs  in  America  during  recent  years 
represent  a  movement  in  the  same  direction.  The  Old  South 
Church  (Trinitarian  Congregational),  Boston,  has  set  aside  its 
outgrown  and  dogmatic  creed  and  substituted  in  its  place  a 
simple  covenant.  Even  Andover  Seminary,  founded  (1807) 
to  oppose  and  demolish  Unitarianism,  no  longer  demands  that 
its  professors  subscribe  its  drastic  theological  confession.  It 
is  satisfied  with  the  mere  declaration  of  a  Christian  purpose. 

Unitarians  ask  no  one  to  sign  a  creed,  because  they 
affirm  that  dogmas  are  neither  central  in  religion  nor  essen- 
tial to  salvation ;  and  also,  because  it  is  wrong  to  tie  the 
mind  to  finalities  when  progress  is  the  true  law  of  life.  They 
do  not  reject  creeds  because  they  believe  so  little.  They  believe 
so  much  that  they  do  not  attempt  to  define  and  confine  their 
faith  within  narrow  and  rigid  bounds.  The  use  of  a  creed 
(though  it  may  contain  many  elements  of  truth)  injures  reli- 


17 

gion  by  diverting  attention  from  reverence  and  righteousness 
(the  essence  of  piety)  to  mere  opinions  that  are  often  remote 
from  Hfe.  This  creed-system  enslaves  reason  and  arrests 
growth.  It  fosters  dupUcity  and  insincerity  by  leading  people 
to  pretend  to  believe  what  they  really  reject;  to  use  old 
phrases  in  a  new  sense,  misrepresenting  the  past  and  disguising 
the  fresh  revelation.  And  it  also  injures  religion  by  tempting 
people  to  quibble  about  words  and  wear  masks  when  they 
ought  to  be  frank  and  explicit  and  clear. 

Unitarians  have  very  strong  convictions ;  but  they  strive  to 
keep  them  vital  and  practical  by  fitting  them  continuously  to 
the  facts  of  life  as  they  are  discovered.  A  creed  is  too  often 
a  tombstone  set  up  to  mark  the  point  where  men  stopped 
growing.  Instead  of  making  truth  authoritative,  it  turns  the 
religious  teacher  into  an  apologist.  Truth  is  no  paralytic  that 
needs  to  walk  on  dogmatic  crutches.  As  in  science,  so  in 
religion,  life  means  growth,  and  growth  means  larger  views  and 
nobler  sentiments.  Fixed  moral  principles  and  an  expanding 
theology  go  hand  in  hand  as  friends.  Unitarians  oppose 
creeds,  not  alone  because  they  are  wholly  or  largely  false,  but 
because  the  method  is  inadequate  and  injurious. 

A  covenant  that  is  coming  into  increasing  favor  among  us 
is  the  following  :  "  In  the  love  of  truth  and  the  spirit  of  Jesus 
Christ,  we  unite  for  the  worship  of  God  and  the  service  of 
man."  All  earnest,  reverent,  loving  men  and  women  can 
stand  on  this  platform ;  and  no  narrower  basis  is  adequate. 
The  church  ought  to  include  all  who  desire  to  be  good  and  to 
do  good.  We  as  Unitarians  insist  on  strong  convictions  and 
positive  religious  instruction,  but  all  this  can  exist  without  the 
use  of  a  formal  dogmatic  creed. 

2.    Beliefs 

It  must  always  be  borne  in  mind  that  no  answer  to  the 
question,  "  What  do  Unitarians  believe?  "  can  be  an  adequate 
description  of  the    Unitarian   Gospel.      While   we   are  great 


believers,  we  insist  that  beliefs  at  best  are  only  fractional,  and 
often  only  secondary,  elements  of  life ;  and  we  hold  that  re- 
ligion is  a  life.  We  have  beliefs  that  are  very  dear  to  us,  con- 
victions that  are  very  powerful  with  us,  but  we  stand  for 
something  larger  and  more  vital  than  these  beliefs  and 
convictions. 

Moreover,  we  hold  that  many  theological  beliefs,  or  specu- 
lations, are  too  remote  from  the  motives  and  ideals  of  daily 
life  to  have  any  moral  or  spiritual  value.  We  have  aspirations, 
sentiments,  and  principles,  that  seem  more  important  than 
our  doctrinal  theories.  Certainly  they  are  more  important 
than  the  dogmas,  like  election  and  justification,  which  deal 
with  metaphysical  problems  that  are  no  more  a  part  of  vital 
piety  than  the  atomic  theory  or  the  binomial  theorem. 

We  can  put  no  brief  dogmatic  statement  into  any  person's 
hand  and  say :  ''  If  you  believe  this  you  are  a  Unitarian." 
Whether  a  man  is  a  Unitarian  is  determined  by  a  different 
measurement:  "What  is  your  life?"  The  briefest  definition 
of  a  Unitarian  is,  "  The  Fatherhood  of  God  and  the  brother- 
hood of  man  applied."  This  language  does  not  mean  that  we 
claim  to  be  better  than  other  people.  We  simply  affirm  that 
the  spirit  of  the  life  is  itself  "  religion."  No  particular  belief 
about  baptism  or  communion,  the  Bible,  or  even  the  rank  of 
Jesus,  by  itself  makes  any  one  a  Unitarian. 

A  description  of  the  Unitarian  religion  deals  only  inciden- 
tally with  speculative  doctrines  ;  and  it  deals  with  them  chiefly 
to  show  that  they  are  relatively  unimportant.  We  go  deeper 
into  life  and  ask,  *'  What  are  your  affections  and  aspirations, 
your  motives  and  ideals?"  Here  is  the  real  religion.  We 
need  more  clear  thinking  in  religion  as  everywhere  else ;  but 
it  ought  to  be  first  of  all  clear  thinking  about  the  practical 
problems  of  the  religious  life. 

Our  chief  aim,  therefore,  is  not  so  much  to  impose  opinions 
as  to  cultivate  the  spirit  of  a  true  life,  to  develop  and  enrich 
character  and  to  lead  people  into  helpful  services.     We  do 


19 

not  assume  that  our  theories  or  motives  are  perfect ;  but  we 
feel  that  they  inchide  enough  truth  and  nobihty  to  save  those 
who  faithfully  put  them  into  practice.  All  that  we  can  ask  is 
tha^  every  one  shall  live  according  to  his  best  conviction ;  this 
is  tfie  demand  of  God  upon  all.  And  we  most  heartily  grant 
that  those  who  differ  with  us  possess  large  elements  of  precious 
truth,  —  sufficient  for  their  need  if  they  are  loyal  to  it. 

Among  Unitarians,  differences  of  belief  cause  no  bitterness 
and  occasion  no  censure.  But  just  because  we  are  so  free  to 
handle  the  facts  of  life,  nearly  all  of  us  reach  nearly  the 
same  conclusions.  There  is  among  us  that  general  agreement 
on  essentials  that  is  found  in  the  realms  of  science.  It  is, 
however,  a  unity  in  diversity  rather  than  a  formal  uniformity 
of  opinion.  And  as  among  scientists,  so  with  us,  those  who 
differ  with  us  are  not  "  heretics,"  but  beloved  fellow-workers, 
whom  we  are  to  instruct  or  from  whom  we  are  to  learn.  In 
view  of  these  facts,  no  one  can  make  an  "authoritative"  state- 
ment of  Unitarian  affirmations  that  must  be  accepted  as  final 
and  essential.  We  can  only  describe  the  religious  convictions 
commonly  held  among  us  at  the  present  time. 

3.   A  Progressive  Movement 

It  is  well  to  remember  that  Unitarians  constitute  a  pro- 
gressive movement  of  religious  thought  and  life.  There  is 
movement  in  all  religious  dispensations,  even  those  most  en- 
slaved by  tradition  or  most  bound  by  creeds.  Where  there  is 
life  there  must  be  change.  There  is  progress  among  Episco- 
palians, Presbyterians,  and  Catholics.  But  just  at  this  point, 
there  is  a  radical  difference  between  us  and  many  other 
churches.  The  changes  which  others  resist,  we  welcome.  The 
progress  which  they  reluctantly  accept,  we  most  gladly  foster. 

Protestants  in  general  assert  and  enforce  a  creed  which  is 
presented  as  a  final  statement  of  truth  that  one  must  believe 
to  be  saved.  We  put  our  emphasis  on  a  method  of  discovery, 
being  always  on  the  lookout  for  larger  and  clearer  views  of 


20 

truth  and  duty.  What  seems  essential  tp  us  is  not  any  tran- 
sient form  of  opinion,  but  the  method  of  truth-finding  by 
which  progress  is  made  continuous ;  and  what  seems  supreme 
to  us  is  not  any  particular  mode  of  service,  but  the  sentiment 
of  love  which  constantly  creates  more  fruitful  services.  Con- 
servatives defend  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints.  In 
the  conviction  that  God  now  abounds,  and  that  his  oracles  are 
still  open,  we  reverently  watch  the  present  heavens  and 
earnestly  listen  to  living  voices  for  the  revelation  of  a  still  more 
glorious  gospel. 

Dogmatists  decry  innovations  and  stand  guard  on  the  an- 
cient wails  built  around  the  sanctities  of  piety  by  a  Luther,  a 
Calvin,  or  a  Wesley.  But  Unitarians,  discarding  the  rusty  armor 
and  leaving  behind  crumbling  traditions,  keep  in  the  open 
field  and  on  the  march,  feeling  that  no  one  is  so  safe  or  so 
strong  as  he  who  is  in  the  pursuit  of  truth ;  and  feeling,  also, 
that  wherever  men  may  tent  that  spot  will  be  the  abode  of 
the  living  God  !  We  move  forever  onward,  not  because  we 
lack  appreciation  of  past  worthies  and  olden  symbols,  not  be- 
cause we  are  disturbed  by  doubt  and  distracted  by  uncertainty, 
but  because  we  have  confidence  in  the  unfolding  process,  as  a 
divine  process,  and,  also,  because  we  have  confidence  in  the 
leadership  of  love  and  truth,  under  which  we  march.  There- 
fore we  cease  to  be  Unitarians  when  we  cease  to  grow ! 

4.   More  than  Negation 

The  Unitarian  movement  is  something  more  than  a  protest 
against  the  creeds  of  Christendom.  If  we  destroy  the  old 
house  of  worship,  it  is  to  build  on  firmer  foundations  a  grander 
temple.  If  we  criticise  a  long  cherished  belief,  it  is  to  create 
one  more  in  harmony  with  the  truth  of  things  and  more  pro- 
ductive of  personal  righteousness.  We  deny  the  less  that  we 
may  affirm  the  greater.  When  Luther  laid  down  the  heavy 
load  of  mediceval  superstitions  he  had  more  power  than  he 
possessed  before  ;  he  possessed  himself,  with  freedom  to  use 


21 

his  strength  in  more  fruitful  fashion.  The  lad  who  goes  away 
to  school  loses  the  petty  notions  of  his  neighborhood,  but  he 
gains  the  light  and  glory  of  a  broad  horizon. 

Our  affirmations  of  religious  truth  may  seem  very  harmful  to 
piety  when  first  heard  by  many  people,  because  apparently 
destructive  to  their  long-cherished  opinions.  But  let  it  be  re- 
membered that  it  is  impossible  to  preach  salvation  by  character 
without  sweeping  aside  the  theory  of  sacrificial  atonement. 
To  proclaim  that  God  is  a  divine  Father  to  all  his  children  is 
a  larger  and  more  positive  view  of  Providence  than  the  theory 
of  Calvin ;  and  yet,  it  is  absolutely  destructive  of  Calvinism. 

It  is  sometimes  carelessly  said  that  we  beheve  little  and 
that  our  teaching  is  negative.  We  do  reject  many  things 
long  considered  necessary  to  salvation,  but  we  do  this  because 
we  really  believe  vastly  more  than  our  fathers  did.  We  are 
not  living  in  the  echpse  but  at  the  dawn  of  rational  faith.  We 
believe  so  absolutely  in  God  as  goodness  that  we  claim  that 
more  than  a  small  fraction  of  mankind  will  be  saved.  We 
believe  so  profoundly  in  the  moral  law  that  we  hold  that  only 
holiness  is  blessedness.  We  believe  so  mightily  in  the  sincerity 
of  Providence  that  we  teach  that  it  is  a  thousandfold  better 
to  bear  our  own  cross  than  to  hide  behind  the  cross  of  Jesus. 
We  believe  so  fully  in  human  nature  that  we  assert  that  it  was 
capable  of  producing  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

We  are  not  Unitarians  because  we  reject  the  dogma  of  the 
Trinity;  we  are  Unitarians  because  we  have  put  ourselves 
under  the  command  of  reason  and  have  accepted  the  modern 
discoveries  of  the  unity  in  things  and  souls.  Our  disbelief  in 
the  trinitarian  formula  is  merely  incidental  to  our  subhmely 
positive  convictions  respecting  God  and  man.  It  is  what  we 
have  discovered  about  the  universe  that  discredits  the  Nicene 
creed.  We  have  therefore  put  aside  this  formula,  not  because 
it  is  wholly  false  and  not  because  we  have  lost  our  faith  in 
the  Almighty,  but  because  the  old  words  do  not  adequately 
describe  our  thought  of  the  immanent  God. 


22 


We  are  not  Unitarians  because  we  deny  the  deity  of  Jesus ; 
we  are  Unitarians  because  we  believe  in  the  unity  of  history 
and  the  divinity  of  human  nature  ;  and  these  larger  and  more 
positive  views  of  Providence  compel  us  to  think  of  Jesus  as 
infinitely  grander  and  more  helpful  than  a  mystical  "  God- 
Man." 

We  are  not  Unitarians  because  we  set  aside  the  theory  of 
Scriptural  infallibility ;  we  are  Unitarians  because  we  trace 
the  revelation  of  truth  and  the  incarnation  of  divinity  so  widely 
throughout  the  evolution  of  humanity  that  we  are  able  to  affirm 
the  universal  Fatherhood  of  God,  and  having  reached  this 
mount  of  vision,  every  dogma  that  denies  the  immanence  of 
God  in  all  souls  seems  a  profanation,  and  every  creed  that  im- 
phes  finality  in  a  text  seems  a  rejection  of  the  living  God. 
We  do  not  reject  the  Bible  ;  we  only  reject  those  irrational 
uses  of  the  Bible  that  seem  to  us  to  banish  God  from  the  pres- 
ent world. 

UNITARIAN   PRINCIPLES 

The  position  most  peculiar  and  fundamental   to 
Human  Unitarians  is  the  view  of  man  himself.     We  build 

Nature  ^^^  religious  ideals,   methods,   and  hopes  on  the 

demonstrable  facts  of  human  nature.  We  begin  with  facts  of 
human  experience  and  find  in  them  the  revelation  of  a  way  of 
life  and  the  demonstration  of  a  divine  Fatherhood.  We  go 
to  the  naturalist  and  accept  what  he  has  discovered  respecting 
the  origin  of  man.  We  go  to  the  psychologist  for  instruction 
upon  the  nature  of  the  soul,  —  the  evolution  of  conscience, 
the  scope  of  imagination,  the  power  of  sentiment,  the  authority 
of  reason.  We  go  to  the  historian  and  learn  what  humanity 
has  achieved,  tracing  the  onward  sweep  of  civilization,  with 
law,  literature,  art,  government,  commerce,  science,  and  religion. 
We  go  to  the  educator  and  discover  how  intellect  and  heart 
are  trained  and  unfolded.  We  go  to  the  philanthropist  and 
watch  the  creative  methods  by  which  defectives  and  criminals 


23 

are  improved  and  reformed.  We  go  to  the  student  of  com- 
parative religion,  and  listen  while  he  reads  from  out  all  the 
Bibles  of  the  race  noble  commands  for  purity,  sweet  messages 
of  hope,  and  tender  prayers  of  trust.  We  hsten  also  as  he 
describes  rites  and  symbols  by  which  the  spirit  of  man  has 
pictured  and  cultivated  the  feeling  of  reverence  and  the  passion 
for  holiness. 

We  gather  all  these  facts  from  the  widest  circle  of  experi- 
ence, and  in  the  light  of  these  truths  we  affirm  that  man  is  a 
spiritual  being,  the  outcome  of  nature's  highest  creative  im- 
pulse. A  being,  imperfect  but  progressive,  with  native  capacity 
for  the  discovery  of  truth,  for  moral  development,  for  religious 
feeling,  and  for  the  outgrowth  of  sin. 

We  accept  this  truth  respecting  human  nature  as  the  basis 
and  starting  point  ,of  our  religious  doctrines  and  methods. 
Man  has  been  very  imperfect,  but  he  has  stumbled  on  through 
ignorance  and  waywardness,  sorrow  and  superstition  to  higher 
civilization  and  nobler  character.  There  is  in  him  more  good 
than  evil,  otherwise  his  creation  would  be  a  horrible  blunder, 
impeaching  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  Providence.  We 
discover  that  there  is  an  essential  unity  in  languages,  customs, 
and  institutions,  because  human  nature  is  everywhere  essentially 
the  same.  There  is  no  real  division  of  history  into  natural  and 
supernatural. 

To  all  men,  some  truth  has  been  divinely  revealed ;  to  no 
man  has  absolute  truth  been  miraculously  imparted.  Every- 
where men  have  loved,  found,  and  incarnated  in  character  and 
civilization  some  measure  of  the  true,  the  good,  and  the  beauti- 
ful. Sin  everywhere  and  always  brings  pains  and  penalties ; 
but  sinners  from  the  first  have  repented  and  reformed,  for  the 
way  out  of  sin  has  everywhere  been  open  to  all,  and  in  all  ages 
it  has  been  the  same,  the  turning  of  the  penitent  heart  through 
divine  disciplines  to  its  better  estate  in  purity  and  peace. 
Saints,  too,  have  arisen  among  all  peoples  because  the  soul  has 
an  inherent  capacity  for  righteousness. 


24 

Wherever  we  find  man,  there  we  find  a  rehgious  effort  com- 
mensurate with  his  intelligence  and  conscience.  Man  has  a 
native  impulse  toward  discovery,  for  his  reason  impels  him  to 
ask  questions  and  find  causes.  He  has  a  native  sense  of  justice 
that  reports  and  enforces  the  moral  law ;  and  this  ethical  power 
enables  him  to  turn  from  sin  and  live  in  purity  and  integrity. 
He  has  a  native  capacity  for  worship,  and  wherever  he  goes 
he  builds  an  altar,  at  which  he  worships  a  divine  ideal.  From 
crude  idolater  to  most  spiritual  theist,  the  soul  feels  after  and 
finds  somewhat  of  the  common  Father. 

jj  From  this  thought  of  man,  we  pass  on  to  our 

Thought  thought  of  God.    Gur  knowledge  of  man  makes  our 

^  conception  of  God  clear  and  certain,  however  in- 

complete. Because  we  have  discovered  the  soul,  we  must  be- 
lieve in  God.  The  finite  divinity  resident  in  man  reveals  an 
infinite  divinity  in  a  Fatherhood  from  which  it  flows.  Be- 
cause we  have  an  intelligence  that  discovers  an  intelligible  order 
in  the  universe,  we  are  compelled  to  affirm  an  infinite  cause  that 
is  intelligent.  This  is  the  only  way  by  which  we  can  account  for 
ourselves.  That  parental  life  which  reports  itself  in  us  must  be 
akin  to  that  which  is  highest  in  ourselves.  The  conscience 
within  us  which  reveals  and  commands  moral  law,  by  uncovering 
what  is  inherent  in  the  universe  and  taking  its  authority  from  the 
Immanent  Life,  constrains  us  to  affirm  that  the  Power  in  which 
we  live  is  moral.  For,  if  otherwise,  how  could  we  have  a 
conscience?  How  have  a  moral  sentiment,  unless  there  is  a 
moral  life  abroad  in  nature  upon  which  it  can  feed?  As 
the  eye  proves  the  existence  of  light,  so  conscience  implies 
the  presence  of  righteousness  in  the  cosmos,  of  which  we  are 
a  part. 

The  love  which  overflows  in  our  souls  must  take  its  rise 
from  the  mountain  heights  of  Infinite  Being  outside  our- 
selves. It  could  not  move  my  breast  with  such  awful 
and  mysterious  power,  were  there  not  behind  it  the  pressure 
of  the  universe.     It  could  not  so  fill  and  possess  me  were 


25 

it  not  a  constituent  of  that  Universal  Life,  in  which  my  life 
is  rooted  ! 

Therefore,  it  is  when  we  take  our  stand  within  the  soul  it- 
self, and  survey  its  sublime  and  varied  elements,  —  its  capacity 
to  discover  truth,  revealing  the  nature  of  the  distant  star  and 
laying  bare  the  creative  processes  at  work  in  the  flower ;  its 
ability  to  uncover  moral  law  and  also  furnish  motive  power  for 
hero  and  saint ;  its  marvellous  creations  of  ideal,  affection,  and 
aspiration  ;  its  sense  of  an  Encompassing  Divineness  which 
pours  itself  out  in  a  myriad  forms  of  worship,  —  it  is  from 
these  spiritual  facts  of  our  own  nature  that  we  rise  irresistibly 
to  the  thought  of  a  Fatherhood,  from  whom  all  this  springs 
and  by  whom  it  is  fostered  ! 

Unitarians  reach  their  belief  in  God  by  way  of  the  soul. 
These  essential  factors,  —  thought,  conscience,  love  —  could 
not  be  in  our  life  unless  in  the  Universal  Life.  What  is  in  the 
dewdrop  is  in  the  ocean.  And  when  we  survey  human  his- 
tory, and  see  how  the  thought  of  God  has  dominated  the 
mind  of  man,  we  must  conclude  that  there  is  an  Infinite  Real- 
ity in  the  universe  of  which  this  thought  is  the  report.  It  is 
unreasonable  to  suppose  that  such  a  persistent  and  prominent 
conviction  should  have  no  cause  in  the  nature  of  things.  This 
belief  in  God  is  given  in  the  experience  of  life.  It  is  forced 
upon  us  by  the  universe  itself.  We  must  accept  it  as  grounded 
in  reality,  or  admit  that  the  universe  is  a  deceptive  phantom 
and  our  faculties  false  reporters.  But  science  assumes  that 
our  reason  is  a  faithful,  if  imperfect,  discoverer  of  realities. 
If  it  were  not  so,  there  could  be  no  science. 

As,  therefore,  the  pressure  of  the  real  universe  constrains 
man  to  say  "  God,"  we  must  accept  the  report  as  true  in 
essence  however  imperfect  in  form.  And  just  because  science 
traces  everywhere  in  nature  a  rational  order  that  implies  in- 
telligence and  in  history  a  moral  order  that  implies  a  righteous 
Providence,  we  affirm  an  ideal  of  God  that  is  best  described 
by  the  one  great  word  —  "  Fatherliood." 


26 

The  thought  of  God  is  a  commanding  necessity  of  our 
moral  and  intellectual  life.  We  cannot  free  ourselves  from 
it.  It  is  implied  in  the  processes  of  thinking.  We  may  deny 
the  truth  of  this  or  that  teaching  respecting  the  Infinite,  but 
somewhere  in  our  interpretation  of  the  universe  this  Reality 
will  emerge  under  some  name  ;  somewhere  in  our  explanation 
of  life  will  the  parental  Verity  be  assumed.  It  is  a  thought  in 
constant  flux ;  for  life  itself,  to  whose  varying  limits  it  is  ever- 
more fitted  is  an  evolution.  But  while  variable  in  form,  it  is 
perpetually  present  in  some  form,  sometimes  wearing  a  human 
disguise  and  sometimes  under  cover  of  negation  itself.  For 
often  we  outgrow  our  real  atheism  by  leaving  behind  ancient 
ideals  of  deity. 

The  necessity  is  not  so  much,  however,  that  we  say  "  God," 
as  that  we  make  the  word  mean  something  worthy  Him  whom 
it  symbolizes  and  spiritually  helpful  to  him  who  uses  it.  It  is 
a  sublimely  inspiring  word  if  it  is  made  to  comprehend  the 
sublimity  of  truth  and  the  inspiration  of  love.  But  we  may 
lift  up  reverent  hands  in  the  elaborate  worship  of  a  vast  temple, 
and  yet  be  near  the  verge  of  atheism  if  we  limit  the  family  of 
God  to  those  who  worship  in  that  place.  What  we  need  as  a 
tonic  atmosphere,  in  which  to  grow  more  divinely  strong  and 
beautiful,  is  a  thought  of  God  rooted  in  a  trust  deeper  than 
texts,  speaking  in  prayers  that  are  more  than  petty  petitions, 
creating  a  reverence  commensurate  with  truth  and  goodness, 
inspiring  a  fellowship  which  embraces  all  that  is  human,  and 
perfecting  the  hope  of  a  heaven  that  is  more  than  escape  from 
penalty. 

The  richest  fruitage  of  the  spirit  is  a  thought  of  God  that 
links  itself  with  all  that  is  beautiful  in  nature ;  that  embraces 
all  souls  in  its  providential  ministries ;  that  finds  revelation 
wherever  truth  is  discovered,  and  divine  service  wherever  truth 
is  lived ;  and  this  thought  of  God,  in  the  fulness  of  love  and 
sympathy,  casts  out  the  atheism  latent  in  every  form  of 
inhumanity. 


27 

_  If  man  is  what  science  defines  him  to  be,  and  if 

Revelation       the  thought  of  God  is  given    in    human    experi- 

t°?,^^  ence  as   described,  then  we  must  understand  by 

Bible  '  ^ 

"revelation"  a  process  as  natural  as  human  life 
and  as  large  as  human  history.  All  discovery  of  truth  is  a 
revelation  of  God  and  all  progress  of  mankind  is  incarnation 
of  God.  And  while  some  writings  become  Scripture  because 
of  the  precious  truths  which  they  contain,  they  are  neither 
supernatural  nor  infallible. 

We  accept  and  honor  the  Bible  as  the  best  of  many  similar 
Scriptures,  but  all  were  produced  by  the  same  causes  and  under 
the  same  laws.  It  is  the  most  valuable  religious  literature  in 
existence,  worthy  our  constant  and  reverent  study.  But  it 
must  be  read  for  increase  of  life.  Its  texts  must  be  handled 
by  the  free  reason,  not  to  formulate  a  creed  but  to  enrich 
character.     It  has  no  monopoly  of  truth. 

The  Bible  contains  some  errors  and  many  noble  truths  ; 
numerous  legends  and  much  inspiring  history.  No  statement 
is  true  simply  because  it  is  in  the  Bible,  while  all  its  teachings 
must  be  tested  by  experience  and  subjected  to  the  authority 
of  reason  and  conscience. 

Revelation  is  a  process  that  overflows  texts,  antedates  Bibles, 
and  outlives  creeds.  It  lies  back  of  all  litanies ;  it  lights  up 
all  symbols  ;  it  clothes  the  prophet  with  power ;  it  gives  author- 
ity to  institutions.  In  this  larger  view,  we  lose  the  Bible  as  a 
lumber  room  for  dogma,  but  we  enter  it  by  the  new  gateway 
of  reason  and  find  it  a  rich  pasture-land  for  the  free  soul.  We 
escape  from  it  as  a  prison,  to  come  back  to  it  as  a  wonderful 
treasure  house  of  spiritual  things.  We  cease  to  use  them  to 
club  doubt  and  bind  inquiry,  but  we  learn  diviner  uses  :  we 
pile  its  texts  on  the  altar  fires  of  the  heart  to  create  heavenly 
motives. 

We  must  have  a  theory  of  the  Bible  which  includes  all  the 
facts,  and  a  use  of  the  Bible  subject  to  reason  and  conscience. 
The  Protestant  creed-makers    did  the  best  they  could ;    but 


28 

with  only  one  Sacred  Book  before  them  and  only  a  very 
limited  knowledge  of  religious  history,  their  opinions  respect- 
ing revelation  and  the  Bible  were  necessarily  as  imperfect 
as  a  theory  of  botany  based  upon  the  study  of  one  tree. 
Science  demands  that  we  study  all  trees  and  all  Scriptures 
and  make  our  theories  fit  all  the  facts.  We  need  not  de- 
spise the  creed-makers ;  we  must  not  neglect  the  facts.  We 
may  honor  the  old  scholar,  while  laying  away  his  imperfect 
notion  in  the  museum  of  antiquities,  along  with  the  stone  axe. 
Any  theory  is  injurious  to  both  the  Bible  and  humanity  which 
claims  for  the  Bible  more  than  it  claims  for  itself,  and  it  no- 
where lays  claim  to  infallibility ;  and  any  theory  of  revelation 
is  inadequate  which  neglects  the  facts  of  universal  religion ; 
while  all  uses  of  texts  are  harmful  except  those  that  make 
the  soul  alive  to  the  presence  of  God  and  the  hand  active  in 
helpfulness. 

The  Unitarian  freely  accepts  all  the  assured  discoveries  of 
Biblical  science    and  gladly  adjusts  his    religious  uses  of  the 
Bible  to  these  facts,  being  perfectly  confident  that  all  this  new 
truth  will  abundantly  enrich  piety. 
ly  Reason  has  been  the  discoverer  and  revealer  from 

Authority  the  beginning,  as  love  has  been  the  master  motive 
of  Reason  .    ,  .  ,  . 

power ;  and  these  are  progressive  elements  of  an 

ever-unfolding   human    nature.     Reason    cannot    explain   all 

mysteries,  but  it  must  be  free  to  investigate  them.     It  does  not 

create  religion,  but  it  must  be  used  to  guide  religious  sentiment. 

It  does  not  destroy  piety,  but  only  that  which  is  false  in  the 

forms  of  piety.     Unitarians  demand  the  right  to  reason  freely  in 

religion,  and  they  grant  all  others  the  same  privilege.     They 

strive  to  have,  as  far  as  possible,  a  perfectly  rational  religion ; 

and  they  use  reason  and  conscience  as  the  supreme  authorities 

in  religious  matters. 

The  authority  of  tradition  and  text,  of  apostle  and  council, 

is  simply  the   authority  of  some  other  man.     It  is  worthy  of 

respectful  consideration,  but  it  should  never  be  put  between 


29 

us  and  tne    living  God.     The  assumption  that  the  Apostles 
exercised  final  authority  respecting  beliefs  and  ceremonies  is 
neither  historically  true  nor  spiritually  helpful. 
V  If  man  is  what  we  discover  hmi  to  be,  Jesus  may 

Jesus  ^^  explained  as    the  ripened   product   of   human 

nature  without  dishonor  to  him  and  with  clearer  appreciation 
oi"  mankind  in  general.  If  we  follow  the  first  three  and  most 
reliable  Gospels,  we  must  believe  in  the  humanity  of  Jesus. 
If  God  is  what  reason  and  nature  reveal  him  to  be,  the  asser- 
tion that  Jesus  was  God  is  unthinkable. 

The  whole  world  is  becoming  more  and  more  appreciative 
of  the  wonderful  excellence  and  transcendent  nobility  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  ;  but  the  modern  mind  and  the  modern  -heart  are 
beginning  to  see  and  feel  that  the  mysticism  of  the  church 
which  has  centred  in  him  and  which  has  grown  up  about  him 
is  in  many  instances  a  most  unfortunate  denial  of  both  the 
Fatherhood  of  God  and  the  sonship  of  man  as  taught  by  Jesus 
himself  and  as  reinforced  by  modern  discovery. 

An  atheistic  limitation  has  vitiated  dogmatic  theology  from 
the  first,  —  an  unwillingness  to  leave  Jesus  in  the  sphere  of 
humanity  as  illustration  and  evidence  of  the  divine  in  the 
human.  But  just  here,  and  only  here,  is  still  his  providential 
office,  —  not  to  stand  outside  the  race  as  a  unique  and  mystical 
being,  mediating  between  heaven  and  earth,  but  to  stand  within 
the  race  as  the  Witness  of  God  in  man  by  nature,  in  this 
way  revealing  the  possibility  that  is  ours,  and  also  helping  us 
to  its  realization  in  saintly  character.  Jesus  has  been  thrust 
between  the  soul  and  God  by  the  theologians  as  a  supernatural 
agent  in  touch  with  only  a  fraction  of  mankind  ;  but  if  he  is 
to  perform  any  continuing  spiritual  service  for  us,  it  must  be 
by  helping  us  through  his  example  and  the  inspiration  of  his 
spirit  to  commune  with  God  our  Father  through  a  daily  life 
that  is  loving  and  lovable. 

The  traditional  interpretation  which  insists  that  all  of  God 
walked  forth  on  earth  in  Jesus,  and  that  he  is  the  only  son  of 


30 

God,  is  a  most  unfortunate  limitation  of  God.  It  is  the  nega- 
tion rather  than  the  revelation  of  Fatherhood.  The  ''  only  " 
son  of  God  ?  Is  Providence,  then,  a  fiction,  and  the  "  Our 
Father"  of  the  immortal  prayer  an  impertinence?  The 
"  only  "  son  of  God?  Is  there,  then,  only  one  point  at  which 
divinity  and  humanity  meet  and  flow  together?  This  sweeps 
away  the  fundamental  postulate  of  science  that  the  Infinite 
Power  is  everywhere  directly  and  perpetually  resident. 

The  modern  world,  in  its  practical  work,  assumes  an  im- 
mediate association  of  human  and  divine.  The  educator  has 
found  a  more  adequate  thought  of  God  than  that  which  limits 
sonship  to  Jesus ;  for  when  he  penetrates  any  mind  and  makes, 
Godward,  a  demand  for  more  life,  it  comes  immediately  from 
the  fulness  of  Infinite  Life.  The  educational  method,  every- 
where supreme  to-day,  lays  emphasis,  not  on  the  propitiatiotiy 
but  the  appropriation,  of  God  ! 

There  is  something  infinitely  more  important  than  the  accept- 
ance of  God  in  Christ :  it  is  to  honor,  love,  obey,  and  serve 
the  divine  Life  everywhere  present  in  human  nature.  The 
"only"  son  of  God?  How  the  achievements  of  the  philan- 
thropist, who  actually  unfolds  the  latent  divineness  of  human 
nature  without  resorting  to  Galilee,  rebuke  this  dogmatism  that 
forgets  God  !  Instead  of  teaching  that  all  of  God  walked 
forth  in  Jesus  and  nowhere  else,  let  us  rather  affirm  that  some- 
what of  God  abides  wherever  man  resides.  Let  us  make  some 
better  use  of  Jesus  than  to  construe  his  life  so  as  to  shut  out 
divinity  from  the  human  soul  and  outlaw  as  aliens  all  who  have 
not  known  him. 

Just  here  is  the  serious  defect  of  much  of  the  popular  reli- 
gious teaching  of  the  present  day.  "  The  Christ,"  as  a  mysti- 
cal being,  is  thrust  in  between  the  finite  soul  and  the  infinite 
Spirit.  The  fellowship  of  human  and  divine  is  broken 
asunder,  man  is  left  without  adequate  parentage,  and  God  is 
denied  immediate  access  to  man.  There  is  a  failure  of  foith 
to  find  inherent  divineness  in  human  nature,  to  admit  revela- 


31 

tion  in  all  discovery  of  tmth,  to  see  a  real  Providence  in  all 
history,  and  to  appreciate  the  incarnation  as  a  fact  coextensive 
with  goodness. 

The  old  mystical  assertions  respecting  Jesus  are  offensive  to 
the  scientific  mind  and  the  humane  heart,  not  because  love 
of  Jesus  is  lacking,  but  because  the  love  of  truth  and  humanity 
is  greater.  We  crave  a  God  who  is  at  home  in  India  as  well 
as  Judea;  who  is  present  with  the  same  love  in  Moslem  as  in 
Catholic ;  who  is  as  near  to  the  repentant  heart  in  Africa  as 
in  America.  Every  faith  lapses  into  practical  atheism  when  it 
becomes  selfish,  exclusive,  and  partial.  Where,  indeed,  does 
God  operate  if  not  in  all  souls  ?  How  does  man  exist  at  all  if 
not  through  heavenly  tides  of  life  sweeping  every  moment  into 
receptive  hearts?  By  what  power  did  the  Parthenon  rise, 
Buddha  heal  human  sorrows,  and  Socrates  triumph  in  death, 
if  not  by  authority  of  him  who  shepherds  every  soul? 

As  Unitarians,  we  love  Jesus  because  he  was  lovable.  We 
believe  in  him  because  he  so  faithfully  lived  the  sublime  truths 
of  the  moral  law  which  he  taught.  VVe  follow  him  because  he 
revealed  the  true  way  of  life ;  and  having  realized  in  his  own 
character  what  is  possible  for  us,  he  inspires  us  to  live  like  him 
and  educates  us  mightily  in  righteousness. 

But  with  all  our  love  and  reverence  for  Jesus,  we  would  not 
assert  that  he  alone  is  our  teacher,  or  that  he  represents  the 
only  type  of  life  worthy  honor  and  emulation.  We  cannot  do 
without  him ;  but  we  must  not  ignore  the  many  saints  and 
heroes  who  also  reveal  God  to  us  and  who  ought  to  serve  as 
guides  and  examples.  As  we  need  all  the  stars,  so  let  us  love 
all  the  mighty  sons  of  God.  Jesus  does  indeed  reveal  the  love 
of  God  to  us.  But  he  is  not  alone  in  this.  Does  not  the 
mother's  love  also  reveal  God's  love? 

Unitarians  shun  all  dogmatism  respecting  the  rank  and  office 
of  Jesus,  holding  that  the  chief  thing  is  to  cultivate  the  spirit 
of  his  life.  He  ministers  unto  us  most  when  he  moves  us  to 
divine  service.     When  we  try  to  think  of  him  as  a  part  of 


32 

a  mystical  Trinity,  he  vanishes  from  us.  To  represent  him  is 
propitiating  God  is  to  deny  his  gospel.  To  assert  that  we  c  n 
enter  heaven  only  on  his  merits  is  to  dethrone  the  doctrine  jf 
the  divine  Fatherhood  which  he  preached.  To  do  this  is,  ii- 
deed,  to  overthrow  the  moral  law  itself  and  also  to  miss  the  grard 
lesson  of  his  Hfe.  We  affirm  that  Jesus  helps  to  save  us  only  as 
he  inspires  us  to  fulfil  the  royal  law  of  love  in  our  daily  lives, 
yj  It    is   astonishing    and    encouraging    to    note    tht 

Humanity  of  rapid  progress,  during  the  last  few  years,  of  the 
world  of  religious  scholarship  toward  the  humani- 
tarian view  of  Jesus,  long  maintained  by  Unitarians.  What  was 
once  damnable  heresy  now  walks  abroad  as  most  respectable 
Orthodoxy.  A  great  "  book  of  testimonies  "  could  be  made 
similar  to  the  following  statements,  which  reveal  this  remark- 
able advance.  And  this  advance  does  not  represent  less  but 
more  faith  in  God,  not  less  but  more  love  for  Jesus.  The  lives 
of  the  men  holding  these  humanitarian  views  respecting  Jesus 
prove,  by  their  increased  spirituality  and  enthusiasm  for  re- 
ligion, that  there  is  nothing  harmful  to  piety  in  them.  It  is 
not  pretended  that  these  men  are  Unitarians  in  all  respects. 
Their  words  are  quoted  to  show  how  rapid  and  general  the 
movement  of  thought  in  this  direction  really  is. 

It  was  not  upon  his  deity  nor  yet  upon  the  perfection  of  his 
humanity,  that  his  [Jesus']  disciples  founded  the  Christian  church. 
The  men  whom  he  gathered  about  him  regarded  him  in  neither  of 
these  aspects.  They  thought  of  him  only  as  the  Messiah.  .  .  . 
He  is  not  represented  [in  Acts]  as  a  pre-existent,  heavenly  being, 
but  simply  as  a  man  approved  of  God  and  chosen  by  him  to  be  the 
Messiah  and  then  raised  by  him  to  the  position  of  Lord.  Of  the 
Pauline  conception  that  he  had  returned  to  the  glory  which  was 
originally  his  [as  a  being  subordinate  to  God],  we  have  no  hint  in 
these  early  records. 

"Apostolic  Age"   (1897),  pp.  31,  55.     By  Prof.  Arthur 
C.    McGiFFERT,   Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 

Since  Jesus  prayed,  we  must  believe  that  he  felt  a  need  of 
prayer.     He  offered  sincere  thanks  and  sincere  supplications  for 


33 

the  Father's  help.  He  looked  away  from  himself  as  one  con- 
sciously dependent.  He  subordinated  his  will  to  a  higher  will 
(Mark  xiv.  36).  He  secured  inward  quietness  and  strength  by 
casting  himself  upon  the  will  of  God.  Now  in  all  these  situations 
Jesus  comes  before  us  as  a  true  man.  There  is  the  same  creaturely 
dependence  that  we  find  in  ourselves.  Jesus  did  not  have  one  kind 
of  prayer  for  himself  and  another  kind  for  his  disciples.  As  he 
approached  God  with  the  name  Father^  so  he  taught  his  disciples 
to  do.  The  prayers  of  Jesus  can  all  be  prayed  by  his  followers,  as 
far  as  their  circumstances  correspond  with  his.  There  is  nothing 
in  them  that  suggests  a  consciousness  other  than  that  of  an  ideal 

man. 

"Revelation   of   Jesus"    (1899),    p.    169.      By  Prof. 
George  H.  Gilbert,  Chicago  Theological  Seminary. 

Read  all  the  books  of  Christian  devotion  from  the  earliest  to  the 
latest,  and  you  will  find  that  what  they  dwell  upon,  when  they  are 
not  merely  repeating  the  words  of  the  creeds  but  speaking  in  the 
language  of  religious  experience,  is  that  Christ  is  di\v\vit^  just  be- 
cause he  is  the  most  human  of  men,  the  man  in  whom  the  univer- 
sal spirit  of  humanity  has  found  its  fullest  expression  ;  and  that, 
on  the  other  hand,  he  is  the  ideal  or  typical  man,  the  Son  of  Man 
who  reveals  what  is  in  humanity,  y?^j/  because  he  is  the  purest  reve- 
lation of  God  in  man.  ...  In  truth,  the  attempts  of  theology  to 
raise  Christ  above  the  conditions  of  human  life,  and  to  give  him  a 
metaphysical  or  physical  greatness  of  another  kind,  really  end  in 
lowering  him  and  depriving  him  of  his  true  position  in  the  religious 
life  of  man. 

"  Evolution  of  Religion  "  (1893),  vol.  ii.  p.  233. 
By  Prof.  Edward  Caird,  Oxford   University. 

Another  signal  example  of  the  ethical  development  of  doctrine  is 
found  in  conceptions  of  the  person  of  Christ.  The  change  has 
amounted  to  a  recovery  of  his  humanity.  Until  recently,  the 
Christians  of  America  and  England,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Unitarians,  believed  that  Jesus  possessed  and  exercised  all  the  at- 
tributes of  God.  .  .  .  But  now,  although  there  are  many  who  re- 
tain the  old  view,  the  theologians,  thinkers,  and  scholars  of  the 
church  believe  that  Christ  was  under  the  actual  limitations  of 
human  nature.  In  knowledge  he  was  not  omniscient.  He  gained 
information  as  other  men  did.  He  shared  the  opinions  of  his 
time  as  to  the  universe,  and  in  other  essential  respects  was  truly 

3 


34 

human.     He  had  wonderful  insight,  but   he  did  not  have  omni- 
science. 

"Moral    Evolution"  (1896),  p.  403.     By  Prof.  George  Harris,  President 
of  Amherst  College.     Formerly  professor  at  Andover  Theological  Seminary. 

The  whole  christology  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  radically  differ- 
ent from  that  of  the  Synoptics,  and  indicates  a  long  process  of 
evolution.  As  we  have  seen,  the  Synoptic  Gospels  hold  the  view  of 
Christ's  Messianic  character.  He  is  the  promised  anointed  one 
of  David's  royal  line.  There  is  no  hint  [in  the  first  three  Gospels] 
of  a  superhuman  pre-existence,  or  of  a  Logos  doctrine.  .  .  .  His 
[Jesus']  doctrine  of  God's  attitude  to  man  was  that  of  a  Father 
ready  to  forgive  every  penitent,  not  that  of  an  offended  Being  who 
demanded  a  ransom  in  the  way  of  a  bloody  sacrifice.  Such  a 
view  of  God  is  repugnant  to  him.  The  later  doctrine  of  a  media- 
tor who  comes  between  two  parties  that  are  estranged  in  order  to 
reconcile  them  by  the  shedding  of  his  blood  seems  never  to  have 
occurred  to  him. 

"Evolution  of  Trinitarianism  "  (1900),  pp.  291,  342.     By 
Prof.    Levi    L.  Paine,  Bangor  Theological  Seminary. 

A  short  time  before  his  death,  Prof.  Max  Miiller,  of  Oxford 
University,  published  this  statement :  '*  What  for  us  can  there 
be  higher  than  a  man  ?  Angels  we  have  never  seen,  nor  any- 
thing higher  than  man.  That  is  what  Christ  himself  has 
taught  us ;  he  calls  us  his  brothers  and  the  sons  of  the  same 
Father.  What  can  be  higher?  He  does  not  claim  for  him- 
self a  nature  different  from  ours.  Take  his  own  account  of 
himself,  '  I  go  to  my  Father  and  your  Father.'  We  must  not 
make  him  contradict  himself." 

In  the  "Encyclopaedia  Biblica  "  (vol.  ii.  1901)  there  is  a 
remarkable  article  on  "  Jesus "  by  the  late  Rev.  Dr.  A.  B. 
Bruce,  of  the  Free  Church  College,  Glasgow,  an  eminent  and 
conservative  Scotch  Presbyterian  clergyman.  The  whole 
article  is  very  broad,  though  somewhat  timid  and  indistinct. 
This  paragraph  will  show  its  modern  spirit : 

The  words  of  Jesus  concerning  the  future  show  limitation  of 
vision.  In  other  directions  we  may  discover  indications  that  he 
was  the  child  of  his  time  and  people.     But  his  spiritual  intuitions 


arc  pure  truth,  valid  for  all  ages.  God,  man,  and  the  moral  ideal 
cannot  be  more  truly  or  happily  conceived.  Far  from  having  out- 
grown his  thoughts  on  these  themes,  we  are  only  beginning  to 
perceive  their  true  significance.  Mow  long  it  will  be  before  full 
effect  shall  be  given  to  his  radical  doctrine  of  the  dignity  of  man ! 

This  great  work,  the  EncyclopcBdia  Biblical  is  itself  a  most 
promising  sign  of  religious  progress.  Its  leading  editor,  Rev. 
Dr.  Thomas  K.  Cheyne,  is  a  clergyman  of  the  Church  of 
England  and  a  distinguished  professor  at  Oxford.  Its  con- 
tributors are  eminent  divines  or  University  professors.  But 
the  articles  all  represent  advanced  scholarship  ;  some,  like  the 
longest  and  most  notable  on  the  Gospels^  are  extremely  radical, 
more  radical  than  the  positions  of  many  Unitarians.  A  rational 
interpretation  of  religion,  including  the  humanity  of  Jesus,  is 
everywhere  implied  or  expressed. 

Prof.  Adolph  Harnack  of  the  University  of  Berlin,  who 
stands  at  the  head  of  the  scholars  of  the  world  in  the  depart- 
ment of  church  history,  is  a  conservative  student  and  a  pro- 
foundly religious  man.  His  opinions,  therefore,  carry  the 
very  greatest  weight.  He  unreservedly  admits,  in  a  recent 
work,  the  truth  of  the  proposition  for  which  Unitarians  have 
long  contended,  namely,  that  the  deification  of  Jesus  has  no 
warrant  in  Scripture  or  in  fact,  but  was  due  to  his  association 
with  the  Logos  philosophy  of  Alexandria.  It  was  not  an 
original  part  of  Christianity,  but  a  slow  growth  beginning  in 
the  second  century.     He  writes  : 

The  identification  of  the  Logos  [which  had  been  thought  of  as 
an  intermediate  creative  power  or  person  between  the  Almighty 
and  the  Universe]  with  Christ  was  the  determining  factor  in  the 
fusion  of  Greek  philosophy  with  the  apostolic  inheritance,  and  led 
the  more  thoughtful  Greeks  to  accept  the  latter.  Most  of  us  regard 
this  identification  as  inadmissible,  because  the  way  in  which  we 
conceive  the  world  and  ethics  does  not  point  to  the  existence  of 
any  logos  at  all ! 

Professor  Harnack  points  out  that  the  purpose  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  (written  at  the  beginning  of  the  second  century,  but 


36 

not  by  the  Apostle  John)  was  to  carry  out  the  identification 
of  Jesus  with  the  Logos.  Jesus  was  given  a  central  place  in 
a  philosophy  of  creation,  and  this  philosophy  was  provided  with 
a  personal  realization  or  historical  embodiment.  This  Gospel 
contains  some  noble  thoughts  and  affords  many  true  glimpses 
of  Jesus,  but  his  figure  is  more  or  less  distorted  by  the  mists 
of  Greek  mysticism ;  and  the  writing,  as  Harnack  states, 
"cannot  be  taken  as  an  historical  authority  in  the  ordinary 
meaning  of  the  word."  This  assured  conclusion  of  Biblical 
scholarship  is  of  great  benefit  to  religion  in  several  ways :  it 
frees  us  from  mere  speculations,  which  are  now  useless ;  it 
simplifies  religious  teaching ;  and  it  enables  us  to  gain  a  clearer 
and  truer  view  of  Jesus. 

The  admiration  of  Professor  Harnack  for  Jesus  is  un- 
bounded, but  it  is  admiration  for  a  purely  human  character : 

Jesus  is  certain  that  everything  which  he  has  and  everything 
which  he  is  to  accomplish  comes  from  this  Father.  He  prays  to 
him;  he  subjects  himself  to  his  will;  he  struggles  hard  to  find  out 
what  it  is  and  to  fulfil  it.  Aim,  strength,  understanding,  the  issue, 
and  the  hard  must,  all  come  from  the  Father.  This  is  what  the 
Gospels  say,  and  it  cannot  be  turned  or  twisted.  This  feeling, 
praying,  working,  struggling,  and  suffering  individual  is  a  man  who 
in  the  face  of  his  God  also  associates  himself  with  other  men. 

"  What  is  Christianity?"  (1901),  pp.  126,  204. 

Among  the  most  significant  "  signs  of  promise  "  at  present 
may  be  mentioned  the  admissions  made  in  several  of  the  books 
in  the  series  of  "New  Testament  Handbooks"  now  being 
issued  under  the  editorship  of  Prof.  Shailer  Mathews,  of  the 
University  of  Chicago.  Especially  significant  because  these 
little  treatises  are  designed  for  use  largely  by  Sunday-school 
teachers,  and  we  should  naturally  expect  a  cautious  and  con- 
servative treatment  of  all  these  subjects. 

For  years,  Unitarians  have  taught  that  the  story  of  Jesus  as 
given  in  the  first  three  Gospels  represents  him  as  a  real  man  in 
loving  obedience  to  God  with  no  claim  to  deity,  that  the  Book 


37 

of  Acts  reports  the  belief  of  the  original  church  as  purely 
humanitarian,  and  that  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  we  have  a  theo- 
logical discussion  about  Jesus  which  reflects  a  late  and  phil- 
osophical theory  of  his  nature,  with  assertions  of  a  divine  rank 
which  Jesus  did  not  himself  make.  All  these  positions  are 
now  accepted  by  the  writer  of  one  of  these  books,  as  the 
following  quotations  will  show  : 

'•  In  fact,  all  the  way  through  [the  first  three  Gospels],  the 
secret  of  our  Lord's  life  is  his  communion  with  God.  But  just 
here  also  is  the  perfection  of  his  manhood."  Of  the  view  of 
Jesus  held  by  the  first  Christians  at  Jerusalem,  even  after  his 
ascension,  as  described  in  Acts,  it  is  stated  :  "  In  heaven  as  on 
earth  he  [Jesus]  is  commended,  attested,  exalted,  empowered  by 
God,  but  there  is  no  hint  of  a  more  intimate  relation.  .  .  .  The 
death  of  Jesus  is  not  regarded  by  the  early  disciples  as  atoning  or 
vicarious."  The  admission  is  frank  and  complete  that  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  we  have  a  mystical  doctrine  about  Jesus,  largely 
speculative  and  unhistorical :  "The  proof  that  the  Logos  of  the 
Prologue  [John  i.  i-iS]  is  the  Alexandrian  Logos  is  that  the  word 
is  here  hypostatised." 

"Biblical  Theology  of  the   New  Testament"  (1900),  pp.  39,  5-^,  54,  183.    By 
Prof.  Ezra  P.  Gould,  Protestant  Episcopal  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia. 

When  it  is  admitted  that  theological  mysticism  rather  than 
historical  accuracy  is  foremost  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  the  way  is 
cleared  for  the  humanity  of  Jesus  and  a  more  ethical  use  of 
his  name.  And  it  is  just  this  admission  that  is  clearly  made 
in  another  work  belonging  to  this  series,  the  best  book  so 
far  printed  in  the  Enghsh  language  on  the  subject  which  it 
discusses.  The  language  is  this  (referring  to  the  Fourth 
Gospel)  : 

"  The  work  as  a  whole  [is]  adapted  to  the  author's  purpose 
of  theological  exposition  and  interpretation,  in  a  manner  wholly 
incompatible  with  the  clear,  historical  recollection  of  an  eye- 
witness. .  .  .  The  outline  of  the  career  of  Jesus  is  sketched  in  a 
manner  not  merely  out  of  harmony  with  the  triple  tradition  [of 
the  first  three  Gospels],  but  irreconcilable  with  the  historical  situa- 
tion, and  with  the  narrative  itself."     In  other  words,  the  largely 


38 

unhistorical  Christ  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  must  be  surrendered  and 

we  must   go    back   to  the  first  three  Gospels  for  the  real  Jesus. 

When  this  is  done,  the  mystical  God-Man  vanishes  and  we  find 

ourselves  in  the  presence  of  a  real  man,  who  is  vastly  more  lovable 

and  helpful. 

"  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament"  (1900),  pp.  252,  260.    By 

Prof.  Benjamin'  W.  Bacon,  Divinity  School,  Yale  University. 
We  need  give  only  brief  attention  to  a  few  sub- 
MiDor  Matters  J^^^^  •  ^^^  stories  of  Jesus'  miraculous  birth  zxq 
Respecting  poetic  legends  similar  to  those  that  have  grown  up 
around  many  other  great  historic  characters.  They 
reflect  and  report  the  deep  impression  which  he  made  and 
the  noble  spirit  which  he  displayed  in  his  life.  Jesus  was 
undoubtedly  born  at  Nazareth,  the  child  of  lawful  wedlock, 
Joseph  being  his  real  father,  as  Mary  herself  declared,  Luke 
ii.  48. 

It  is  needless  to  spend  time  in  these  days  in  discussing  the 
accounts  of  wonders  wrought  by  Jesus.  They  were  not,  to  the 
people  then  living,  what  we  call  miracles  (violations  or  suspen- 
sions of  natural  laws)  ;  for  the  scientific  conception  of  nature 
as  a  reign  of  law  did  not  then  exist.  Jesus  probably  had 
remarkable  power  over  people  sick  in  body  and  mind.  From 
this  nucleus  of  fact,  the  poetic  tendency  of  the  time,  under  the 
influence  of  Scripture  (especially  the  so-called  Messianic  pas- 
sages), produced  these  stories  which  bear  the  water-marks  of 
the  age  in  which  they  sprang  up.  As  Jesus  himself  invented 
parables  freely  to  convey  his  lessons,  so  his  disciples  wove  these 
parables  about  him  to  symbolize  and  publish  their  beliefs  in  ref- 
erence to  him.  This  is  the  general  conclusion  which  the 
religious  teachers  of  our  day  are  rapidly  accepting.  When  this 
position  shall  be  fully  occupied,  then  the  real  Jesus  will  shine 
with  brighter  light  and  religion  will  work  with  greater  power. 

Jesus  was  in  no  strict  sense  the  fulfilment  of  the  so-called 
Messianic  predictions  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  vary  widely 
in  character,  while  only  a  few  relate  to  a  personal  Messiah. 
He  was   not   the   Messiah    foretold   or   expected.     He   was 


39 

immeasurably  greater,  —  a  sublimely  original  character,  rooted 
in  Judaism  but  transcending  Judaism. 

The  cj'ucifixioii  of  Jesus  is  the  most  pathetic  and  inspiring 
event  in  human  history.  It  is  the  revelation  of  the  divine 
capacity  of  human  nature  and  the  demonstration  of  Jesus' 
spiritual  heroism.  The  cross  is  not  the  scene  of  a  payment 
for  our  sins,  but  the  evidence  of  what  the  soul  can  achieve ; 
not  a  screen  to  hide  our  sins  from  God,  but  a  source  of  inspira- 
tion helping  us  to  outgrow  our  sins.  The  suffering  of  Jesus  on 
the  cross  opens  heaven  to  us  only  as  it  moves  us  to  live  the 
heavenly  life,  — to  suffer  ourselves  that  we  may  enrich  the  lives 
of  others.  The  cross  did  not  purchase  God's  love  for  us. 
That  is  a  hateful  and  immoral  doctrine. 

There  are  insuperable  obstacles  in  the  way  of  believing  in 
the  bodily  resurrection  of  Jesus.  The  first  form  of  this  belief 
was  simply  that  Jesus  was  risen  from  the  dead  (not  the 
"grave")  and  alive  at  God's  right  hand  (Acts  ii.  22-33, 
iii.  15,  iv.  10).  The  sepulchre  legends  grew  up  later.  The 
belief  in  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  did  not  create  Christianity. 
The  love  of  the  disciples  for  Jesus  —  the  motive  and  impulse 
of  Christianity  —  produced  by  his  lovableness,  created  this 
belief,  which  worked  itself  out  along  divergent  lines  from  inci- 
dents and  experiences  now  beyond  our  reach.  These  varying 
stories  at  the  close  of  the  Gospels,  photographed  at  different 
stages  of  growth,  cannot  be  harmonized.  All  effort  to  this 
end  is  labor  wasted.  This  conclusion,  toward  which  reverent 
scholarship  at  present  tends,  does  not  degrade  Jesus  or  de- 
stroy Christianity.  It  enables  us  to  be  at  the  same  time  sci- 
entific and  religious,  to  accept  modern  discovery  and  also  to 
keep  our  love  for  Jesus. 

We  cannot  for  a  moment  admit  that  the  blood  of  Jesus 
made  God  propitious,  or  that  faith  in  it  releases  us  instantly 
from  the  punishment  of  our  sins.  This  seems  to  us  an 
immoral  and  irrational  materialism.  We  protest  against  the 
sacrificial  interpretation  of  Jesus'  death.    Jesus  never  intimated 


40 

that  he  must  shed  his  blood  to  make  God  love  humanity. 
When  the  early  Christians  alluded  to  his  blood,  they  had  his 
life  in  mind,  for  in  that  age  *'  life  "  and  "  blood  "  were  inter- 
changeable terms.  As  Ignatius  wrote  (about  117)  :  "  Be  ye 
renewed  ...  in  love,  that  is,  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ." 

These  and  many  other  difficulties  vanish  as  soon 

Jesus  and  as  we  consider  Jesus  a  purely  human  character. 
The  quotations  just  given,  all  point  to  this  end. 
They  multiply  with  geometrical  ratio  as  the  years  pass.  They 
illustrate  the  irresistible  influence  and  authority  of  the  facts 
themselves.  Sooner  or  later  all  religious  thinking  has  to  be 
adjusted  to  reality.  As  soon  as  the  facts  in  the  Gospel  records 
are  held  in  the  light  of  the  scientific  spirit,  as  soon  as  Jesus  is 
put  clearly  on  the  stage  of  real  history,  and  as  soon  as  the 
laws  of  human  nature  are  applied  to  this  subject,  only  one 
conclusion  is  possible  —  the  humanity  of  Jesus. 

This  is  a  result  to  be  welcomed  rather  than  resisted,  especially 
by  the  friends  of  Jesus  and  the  champions  of  Christianity. 
The  scientist,  to  hold  to  Jesus  at  all,  must  fit  him  to  the  real 
universe  of  law  and  order.  The  historian,  to  keep  his  faith  in 
human  evolution,  must  recognize  in  Jesus  a  natural  product 
of  human  and  historical  forces.  The  philanthropist,  to  find 
the  largest  helpfulness  in  Jesus  as  he  tells  his  story  to  sinner 
and  sufferer,  must  set  him  forth  as  one  who  reveals  the  pro- 
mise and  possibility  of  the  human  soul.  Therefore,  if  religion 
is  to  command  the  attention  of  thinkers  and  vitalize  the  work 
of  reformers,  it  must  present  a  doctrine  of  Jesus  that  is  human 
and  historical.  Just  so  far  as  the  force  of  these  facts  is  felt, — 
and  sooner  or  later  all  must  yield  to  it,  —  the  humanity  of 
Jesus  must  be  accepted. 

The  point  I  wish  to  emphasize  is  this :  In  view  of  the  testi- 
monies just  given,  which  report  the  inevitable  trend  of  religious 
thought,  we  may  confidently  affirm  that  there  is  no  longer  need 
for  more  debate  on  this  point.  The  old  textual  and  dogmatic 
arguments   are   not   only  poindess,  but   practically   obsolete. 


41 

This  is  great  relief  and  gain  for  botli  conservative  and  liberal. 
The  humanity  of  Jesus  may  now  be  assumed  like  the  law  of 
gravitation.  It  is  fust  becoming  an  essential  part  of  the 
thought  of  the  world.  Having,  therefore,  put  behind  us  the 
old  notions,  and  having  reached  a  wider  outlooic  upon  human 
life,  we  find  ourselves  facing  a  new  field  of  opportunity  in 
religion.  The  religious  teacher  may  now  devote  himself  to 
scores  of  more  interesting  and  practical  themes.  He  now  has 
more  time  for  the  spirit  and  message  of  Jesus  as  they  apply 
to  common  human  experience.  He  can  come  down  from  the 
vague  mysticism  of  the  triune  God  and  press  home  the  plead- 
ings and  inspirations  of  Jesus  to  godliness. 

The  task  at  present  before  us  is  to  work  from  this  stand- 
point, and  make  the  character  and  teaching  of  Jesus  more 
vital  and  creative  than  ever  before.  We  must  use  his  edu- 
cating personality  to  chasten  every  wayward  activity  and 
to  unfold  every  dormant  human  capacity.  We  must  bring 
to  bear  his  self-control  and  self-sacrifice  to  extinguish  the 
animal  selfishness.  We  must  apply  his  spirit  to  human 
society  as  an  organic  enthusiasm.  We  must  present  him  as 
an  infinite  encouragement  to  every  one  in  misery,  tempta- 
tion, and  despair.  We  must  bring  his  life  to  bear  upon 
human  hearts  to  make  them  pure,  heroic,  loving,  and  fruitful 
in  every  good  work.  We  must  lead  men  through  him  to  the 
discovery  of  God  as  Father  and  the  recognition  of  their 
neighbor  as  a  brother.  All  the  indications  of.the  hour  show 
us  that  this  is  coming.  The  real  human  Jesus  will  be  more 
loved,  honored,  and  obeyed  than  the  Christ  of  the  creeds. 
j^  The  answer  to   the    question.  What   is   salvation? 

Salvation  is  involved  in  the  larger  question.  What  is  this 
universe?  If  we  live  in  a  miracle-universe,  where  God  sits 
just  above  the  clouds  as  a  bookkeeper,  making  black  marks 
against  our  names  as  we  sin,  and  then  rubbing  them  out  if  we 
will  believe  certain  things  about  the  sacrificial  Christ,  then  the 
way  of  salvation  is  very  easy.     But  no  such  universe  as  that 


42 

really  exists.  The  whole  scheme  is  the  childish  fancy  of  a  far- 
off  time.  In  the  real  universe  our  sins  make  their  mark,  but 
the  sinner  can  turn  from  his  sins.  The  Infinite  Father  is 
always  at  hand  ready  to  help  him  repent.  He  does  not 
demand  satisfaction,  but  righteousness.  The  old  scars  cannot 
be  hidden  behind  the  cross,  but  they  can  be  outgrown.  Our 
sins  are  not  debts  for  which  some  one  must  settle,  but  defects 
which  we  must  conquer  and  outgrow.  Jesus  does  not  rescue 
us  from  the  punishment  of  our  sins,  but  he  helps  us  shed  our 
sinfulness. 

When  men  believed  in  a  miracle-universe  they  imagined 
that,  after  doing  wrong  for  a  lifetime,  they  could  step,  in  a 
moment,  under  a  faucet  of  supernatural  grace  and  be  washed 
clean,  and,  by  pressing  a  button,  an  angel  would  come  with  a 
white  robe,  and,  clothed  in  the  merits  of  Jesus,  they  could  go 
triumphantly  into  heaven  !  But  that  theological  dreamland 
has  faded  away.  No  such  universe  exists.  The  way  to  heaven 
is  always  open  before  the  sinner.  But  it  opens  through  repent- 
ance and  righteousness.  It  runs,  not  through  the  blood  shed 
on  Calvary,  but  through  the  spirit  of  love  which  Jesus  sublimely 
illustrated  on  the  cross.  The  angels  are  near  to  robe  us  in 
white  if  we  live  a  white  life  from  the  heart  out.  The  way  of 
salvation  in  the  real  universe  is  the  way  of  spiritual  growth  and 
beneficent  service.  Jesus  is  divine  helpfulness  to  any  soul  so 
far,  and  only  so  far,  as  he  moves  that  soul  to  live  as  he  lived. 

A  Creator  who  needs  propitiation  is  not  Jesus'  merciful 
Father,  but  a  monster.  When  we  represent  God  as  engaged  in 
imputing  the  merits  of  Jesus  to  sinners,  and  passing  them  into 
heaven  under  cover  of  his  blood,  we  strip  God  of  the  attributes 
that  make  him  worthy  our  respect  and  love.  The  teaching 
that  God  will  accept  belief  in  Jesus'  self-sacrificing  love  for 
loving-kindness  itself,  is  tainted  with  atheism.  If  God  be  God, 
he  will  not  bargain  with  himself,  nor  allow  us  to  hide  behind 
the  cross  ;  he  will  help  man  to  be  the  goodness  which  he 
demands  and  which  alone  is  salvation  !     From  such  traffic  at 


43 

the  throne,  which  was  the  way  of  salvation  described  by  the 
old  theologians,  it  would  be  a  relief  to  escape  into  agnosticism. 
Salvation  is  not  a  commercial  transaction  but  the  enrichment 
of  life ;  it  is  not  an  escape  from  punishment  but  a  growth 
toward  perfection. 

If  man  is  what  history  declares  him  to  be,  there  was  no  fall 
of  Adam,  and  all  the  redemptive  schemes  rooted  in  that  fiction 
become  unreal  and  needless.  If  man  is  what  education  and 
philanthropy  prove  him  to  be,  he  has  native  capacity  for 
progress,  reform,  and  divine  service.  If  man's  needs  are  what 
our  daily  experiences  illustrate,  his  way  of  salvation  lies  through 
culture,  character,  repentance,  and  self-sacrifice.  If  God  is 
what  the  discoveries  of  science  indicate,  the  talk  about  sacri- 
ficial propitiation  is  little  less  than  profanity.  If  the  declara- 
tion of  moral  science  is  correct  that  merit  cannot  be  trans- 
ferred by  imputation,  the  scheme  of  sacrificial  atonement  has 
no  basis  in  reality.  If  Jesus'  teaching  is  true  that  God  is  a 
divine  Father  who  simply  demands  repentance  and  righteous- 
ness, then  salvation  is  the  love  and  purity  which  all  —  Christian 
and  Non-Christian — may  possess.  And  if  really  a  divine 
Father,  God  will  give  all  human  beings  an  opportunity  to 
acquire  some  fraction  of  these  saving  graces,  whether  they  hear 
of  Jesus  or  not. 

As  Unitarians,  we  afiirm  the  glorious  gospel  of  the  blessed 
God,  that  "  character "  is  salvation.  Purity,  love,  justice, 
reverence,  and  mercy  are  the  essentials  of  religion.  We  are 
friends  of  God  so  far  as  we  are  forgiving,  helpful,  devout,  and 
truthful.  We  are  in  heaven  so  far  as  we  live  the  heavenly  life. 
Our  spirituality  is  our  salvation.  But  here  it  ought  to  be  frankly 
stated  that  salvation  is  not  a  term  in  common  use  among 
Unitarians,  partly  because  they  object  to  the  false  views  of  life 
so  long  associated  with  it  (the  implications  of  total  depravity, 
captivity  by  Satan,  and  God's  wrath),  but  chiefly  because  they 
feel  that  what  man  really  needs  is  something  much  larger  than 
the  mere  release  frojn  pimislmient,  which  has  too  often  been  the 


44 

main  thought.     They  emphasize  the  necessity  of  turning  from 
wrong-doing,  but  the  most  important  duty  is  growth  in  wisdom 
and  righteousness  :    the  realization  of  one's  divine  possibihty. 
X  As  children  of  the  living  God,  we  feel  the  assur- 

Immortality  ^^^qq  of  a  future  life.  God  gives  man  this  immortal 
hope.  It  persists  as  an  irresistible  and  indestructible  convic- 
tion in  the  human  heart.  And  as  God  gives  it  to  man,  he  is 
responsible  for  its  fulfilment.  God  does  not  give  birds  wings 
for  flight  and  no  air  in  which  to  fly.  In  yielding  ourselves  to 
this  great  yearning  of  the  heart  we  lean  on  the  integrity  of  the 
universe.  God  cannot  be  so  cruel  as  to  create  in  us  a  false 
hope.  No  just  parent  would  raise  an  expectation  in  his  child 
merely  to  deceive  it.  He  who  is  truth  cannot  feed  men  upon 
lies.  Our  nature,  the  workmanship  of  God,  compels  this 
anticipation;  we  must  trust  it. 

Our  destiny  will  be  shaped  by  the  quality  of  our  life.  We 
shall  import  to  that  heavenly  realm  whatever  heavenly  things 
we  shall  have  imported  into  our  hearts  here.  The  day  of 
judgment  is  forever  in  progress,  because  everything  bears  fruit 
and  makes  a  record.  We  always  stand  in  God's  presence, 
and  at  the  bar  of  an  infinite  justice  that  is  infinite  love. 
The  divine  forgiveness  follows  the  human  forgiveness.  We 
are  forgiven  in  so  far  as  we  are  forgiving,  regardless  of  creed  or 
race  or  time  or  place.    This  is  the  gospel  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

As  this  life  is  vastly  more  than  a  mere  probation^  we  can- 
not think  of  the  future  opportunity  of  progress  as  simply  a 
"  future  probation."  But  as  the  doors  are  open  here  for  re- 
pentance and  reform,  we  believe  that  this  will  be  equally  true 
in  the  life  after  death.  He  who  has  been  our  loving  Father 
here,  will  not  become  a  cruel  monster  the  moment  after  the 
transition  which  we  call  dying.  But  it  would  not  pay  to  sin 
to-day,  if  we  should  have  a  million  chances  to  repent  in  the  mil- 
lion years  to  come.  We  still  insist  that  sorrow  will  last  as 
long  as  sin  lasts ;  and  though  the  door  of  heaven  shall  forever 
remain  open,  no  one  can  go  in  without  love  and  purity. 


45 

An  eternal  hell  is  impossible  in  a  universe  that  all  belongs 
to  God.  To  believe  in  it  is  so  far  to  deny  the  Eternal  Good- 
ness. The  object  of  punishment  is  not  vindictive  but  dis- 
ciplinary, not  retribution  but  education.  If  the  indeterminate 
sentence  is  a  wise  method  for  the  management  of  criminals,  it 
is  a  good  policy  for  the  universe  in  the  discipline  of  sinners. 
The  fear  of  torment  is  not  the  motive  that  creates  heaven ;  it 
may  restrain  an  uplifted  hand,  but  it  never  commissioned  a 
Good  Samaritan.  There  is  surely  no  encouragement  to  sin  in 
believing  that  God  will  continue  to  be  as  good  as  our  own 
hearts,  which  would  save  all.  The  philanthropic  men  and 
women  who  work  to-day  to  rescue  every  wanderer  can  no 
longer  believe  that  the  infinite  Love  who  moves  them  to  com- 
passion will  himself  overwhelm  the  same  wanderers  with  ever- 
lasting misery  because  of  the  sin  committed  during  a  fleeting 
moment  or  from  failure  to  believe  an  abstruse  dogma.  And 
to  say  that  God  cannot  save  all  because  the  human  will  may 
finally  resist  all  his  efforts,  is  practically  to  abolish  God  himself. 
It  is  to  make  man  infinite  and  God  finite. 

Unitarians  do  not  consider  church  ordinances  as 

XI 

Sacraments      sacraments  with  supernatural  saving  power.     They 

follow  here  the  freedom  of  the  spirit,  insisting  that 

nothing  shall  be  done    as   a  mere   formality,   sacred  because 

ancient.    Sanctity  inheres  only  in  utility.     That  only  is  helpful 

which  educates  the  soul  and  represents  a  vital  experience.    In 

many  Unitarian  churches   Communion  is  observed,  but  always 

as  a  purely  memorial  service,  free  from  sacrificial  reference  or 

symbolism.     Adult   baptism   is  practically  unknown,  but  the 

Christening  of  children  is  felt  by  many  to  be  both  beautiful 

and  helpful,  emphasizing  in  an  impressive  manner  parental  joys 

and  responsibilities.     There  are  some  who  feel  that  both  these 

services  are  too  closely  associated  with  outgrown  superstitions 

to  be  any  longer  helpful. 

In  joining  the  church  (increasing  emphasis  is  rightfully  laid 

upon  the  ceremony),  the  new  member  signs  the  Bond  of  Union, 


46 

or  Covenant,  and  receives  from  the  minister  the  Right  Ha7id 
of  Fellowship.  By  the  attendance  of  sympathizing  witnesses 
and  by  appropriate  remarks,  this  ceremony  is  made  an  im- 
pressive and  helpful  event  in  the  Hfe  of  the  individual  and  the 
church.  The  young  people  of  the  parish  are  prepared  for  it 
by  a  Confirmation  Class,  in  which  (commonly  during  Lent) 
they  are  taught  the  principles  and  trained  in  the  sentiments 
that  constitute  our  religious  movement. 

OUR   GOSPEL  AS   DESCRIBED   BY   OUR 
LEADERS 

WILLIAM  ELLERY  CHAINING 
made  this  statement :  '•  Unitarianism  is  in  harmony  with  the 
great  and  clear  principles  of  revelation;  with  the  laws  and 
powers  of  human  nature ;  with  the  dictates  of  the  moral  sense ; 
with  the  noblest  instincts  and  highest  aspirations  of  the  soul ; 
and  with  the  lights  which  the  universe  throws  on  the  character 
of  its  author.  We  can  hold  this  doctrine  without  self-contradic- 
tion, without  rebelling  against  our  rational  and  moral  powers, 
without  putting  to  silence  the  divine  monitor  in  the  breast. 
And  this  is  an  unspeakable  benefit;  for  a  religion  thus  co- 
incident with  reason,  conscience,  and  our  whole  spiritual 
being,  has  the  foundations  of  universal  empire  in  the  breast ; 
and  the  heart,  finding  no  resistance  in  the  intellect,  yields  itself 
wholly,  cheerfully,  without  doubts  or  misgivings,  to  the  love  of 
its  Creator." 

JAMES  FREEMAN  CLARKE 
briefly  stated  in  the  following  words  the  five  leading  principles 
of  the  Unitarian  religion  commended  by  Dr.  Channing : 

I.  The  Fatherhood  of  God. 

II.  The  Brotherhood  of  Man. 

III.  The  Leadership  of  Jesus. 

IV.  Salvation  by  Character. 

V.    Progress  upward  and  onward  forever. 


47 
JAMES  MARTIKEAU 

gave  this  summary  of  the  Unitarian  faith  :  "  We  believe  that 
when  Christianity  shall  be  reborn  from  its  temporary  eclipse 
it  will  rise  again  with  two  commandments  instead  of  ten  — 
the  love  of  God  and  the  love  of  man ;  with  the  beatitudes 
in  place  of  the  creeds ;  with  a  doctrine  of  self-sacrifice  of  the 
human  heart  in  place  of  a  doctrine  of  atonement ;  with  a  be- 
lief in  the  incarnation  of  God  in  humanity  in  the  place  of  the 
personal  incarnation  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ ;  and  that  by  de- 
grees when  that  day  shall  come,  man  will  be  united  to  his 
Maker  by  tenderer,  deeper,  and  more  powerful  ties  than  yet 
have  been  known,  and  that  religion  will  assert  a  power  greater, 
more  comprehensive,  and  more  healing  to  man's  differences 
than  the  world  has  ever  yet  seen." 

PRESIDENT  CHARLES  W.  ELIOT, 

of  Harvard  University,  has  forcibly  described  in  these  words 
the  conviction  commonly  held  among  Unitarians  respecting 
Jesus  :  "  He  spread  abroad,  and  commended  to  the  minds  of 
many  men,  the  loftiest  ethical  conceptions  the  race  had  won. 
He  vitalized  them  by  his  winning  and  commanding  presence, 
and  sent  them  flying  abroad  on  the  wings  of  his  own  beautiful 
and  heroic  spirit.  In  a  barbarous  age  he  was  inevitably  given 
the  reward  of  deification,  just  as  the  Pharaohs  and  Alexanders 
and  Caesars  were ;  and  his  memory  was  surrounded  by  clouds 
of  marvel  and  miracle  during  the  four  or  five  generations  which 
passed  before  the  Gospels  took  any  settled  form.  The  nine- 
teenth century  has  done  much  to  disengage  .  him  in  the 
Protestant  mind  from  these  encumbrances ;  and  the  twentieth 
century  will  do  more  to  set  him  forth  simply  and  grandly  as 
the  loveliest  and  best  of  human  seers,  teachers,  and  heroes. 
Let  no  man  fear  that  reverence  and  love  for  Jesus  will  dimin- 
ish as  time  goes  on.  The  pathos  and  the  heroism  of  his  life 
and  death  will  be  vastly  heightened  when  he  is  relieved  of  all 
supernatural  attributes  and  powers.     The   human  hero   must 


48 

not  have  foreknowledge  of  the  glorious  issue  of  his  sacrifices 
and  pains ;  he  must  not  be  sure  that  his  cause  will  triumph ; 
he  must  suffer  and  die  without  knowing  what  his  sacrifice  will 
bring  forth.  The  human  exemplar  should  have  only  human 
gifts  and  faculties.  If  these  principles  are  true,  the  more 
completely  progressive  liberalism  detects  and  rejects  the  mis- 
understandings and  superstitions  with  which  the  oral  tradition 
and  written  record  concerning  the  life  of  Jesus  were  inevitably 
corrupted,  the  more  will  love  and  reverence  grow  for  the 
splendors  of  truth  and  moral  beauty  which,  as  a  matter  of 
indubitable  fact,  have  shone  from  the  character  and  teachings 
of  this  Jewish  youth." 

BY  THEIR  FRUITS  YE   SHALL   KNOW  THEM 

The  assertion  is  often  made  :  The  Unitarians  have  never 
done  anything  to  help  the  world.  It  is  true  that  we  have  not 
done  as  much  as  we  ought.  And  in  discussing  this  subject 
we  would  not  foster  an  unseemly  pride  or  indulge  in  boast- 
ing. But  we  are  willing  to  let  the  facts  speak  for  them- 
selves. The  record  shows  that  Unitarians  have  been  fruitful 
in  good  works  far  beyond  what  could  reasonably  have  been 
expected  of  them. 

I  Our  American  churches  have  never  embraced  more 

Literature  ^\^^^  ^^^  two-hundredth  part  of  the  population  of 
the  United  States.  If,  therefore,  our  people  have  contributed 
one  two-hundredth  to  the  various  beneficent  activities  of  our 
country,  our  faith  will  show  an  average  fruitfulness.  Any  larger 
proportion  than  this  means  so  much  extra  credit.  Let  us 
then,  from  this  point  of  view,  consider  a  few  facts. 

On  the  ceiling  of  the  vestibule  of  the  Boston  Public  Library 
are  the  names  of  some  score  and  a  half  Americans  who  have 
been  most  eminent  in  art  and  literature,  in  law  and  science. 
Of  those  belonging  to  the  nineteenth  century  nearly  four-fifths 
are  the  names  of  Unitarians  —  some  hundred  and  fifty  times 


49 

Dur  proportion  !  Chief  Justice  Coleridge  of  England,  in  mak- 
ing an  address  at  a  banquet  when  in  this  country  a  few  years 
ago,  referred  to  the  American  authors  most  known  and  honored 
abroad.     Every  one  whom  he  mentioned  was  a  Unitarian  ! 

In  any  list  of  the  thirty  most  eminent  Americans  in  litera- 
ture that  may  be  made,  we  shall  find  at  the  head  Emerson, 
and  after  him  will  come  Longfellow,  Lowell,  Holmes,  Bryant, 
Bancroft,  Motley,  Prescott,  Parkman,  Margaret  Fuller,  Miss 
Alcott,  Channing,  Julia  Ward  Howe,  Thoreau,  Hawthorne,  — 
we  will  not  include  Whittier,  although  he  and  others,  while  not 
nominally  Unitarians,  yet  held  Unitarian  views  in  religion. 
We  can  claim  at  least  half  the  names  in  such  a  list,  however 
made  up,  and  these  by  far  the  most  distinguished.  Or,  in 
other  words,  about  a  hundred  times  our  proportion. 

Another  list  of  names  could  be  made  of  those  distinctly  or 
essentially  Unitarian,  that  would  contain  as  many  distinguished 
persons  as  could  be  found  outside  our  fellowship,  such  as : 
Bayard  Taylor,  George  William  Curtis,  Helen  Hunt,  Bret 
Harte,  Henry  C.  Lea,  Edwin  P.  Whipple,  William  R.  Alger, 
Thomas  Wentworth  Higginson,  O.  B.  Frothingham,  Mrs. 
A.  D.  T.  Whitney,  John  Fiske,  Jared  Sparks,  George  Ripley, 
Charles  Eliot  Norton,  James  T.  Fields,  Richard  Hildreth, 
J.  T.  Trowbridge,  and  many  others.  And  we  do  not  mention 
'lere  many  eminent  persons  who  will  appear  in  some  other 
line  of  activity.  In  the  series  of  biographies  known  as 
"American  Men  of  Letters,"  published  by  Houghton,  IMifflin 
&  Co.,  eleven  of  the  eighteen  are  the  lives  of  Unitarians,  not 
including  the  Unitarian  Quaker,   Whittier. 

We  have  not  been  as  active  in  sending  preachers  to  foreign 
parts  to  plant  churches  as  other  religious  bodies.  But  we 
have  put  "  books  of  life  "  into  the  hands  of  millions  from  the 
logging  camp  of  Maine  to  the  miner's  hut  on  the  Rockies. 
We  would  not  depreciate  the  work  of  others,  for  there  are 
diversities  of  divine  service  ;  but  we  contend  that  a  church 
which  has  made  it  possible  to  put  the  poems  of  Longfellow 

4 


50 

and  the  essays  of  Emerson  into  the  sod  house  in  Kansas 
has  done  as  true  and  noble  missionary  work  as  was  ever  done 
by  circuit  rider.  Both  kinds  of  work  were  needed,  and  let 
each  church  honor  the  other's  mission.  We  do  not  claim  that 
the  literary  pre-eminence  of  these  men  was  solely  due  to  their 
Unitarian  views,  nor  do  we  hold  that  Unitarians  are  neces- 
sarily especially  gifted  with  hterary  genius;  but  it  is  fair  to 
appeal  to  them  as  an  illustration  of  what  Unitarians  have  done 
for  the  world. 

II  In  the  "  History  of  Education  "  by  the  well  known 

Education  French  author,  Compayr^,  the  two  names  men- 
tioned in  the  chapter  on  the  United  States  are  William  Ellery 
Channing  and  Horace  Mann  —  both  Unitarians  !  When  we 
add  to  these  the  names  of  Elizabeth  P.  Peabody,  the  pioneer  in 
Kindergarten  work  in  America ;  William  G.  Eliot,  our  apostle 
of  all  the  humanities  at  St.  Louis  and  the  founder  of  Washing- 
ton University ;  Ezra  Cornell,  who  made  the  institution  bearing 
his  name  possible  ;  Peter  Cooper,  who  created  Cooper  Insti- 
tute, a  pioneer  in  its  line ;  Jonas  G.  Clark,  who  created  Clark 
University ;  Dr.  Samuel  G.  Howe,  the  teacher  of  the  blind ; 
President  Charles  W.  Eliot,  who  in  reorganizing  and  developing 
Harvard  University  has  done  a  monumental  work  for  education 
in  America,  — we  have  at  least  a  quarter  of  the  names  of  those 
most  influential  in  the  educational  progress  of  our  land  during 
the  past  century,  —  a  number  out  of  all  proportion  to  our  size 
as  a  religious  body. 

jjj  Some  of  the  activities  along  these  lines  have  already 

Philanthropies  been  indicated  :  but  there  are  others  to  be  added, 
and  they  may  be  represented  by  the  following 
names  :  Joseph  Tuckerman,  the  first  in  this  country  to  organize 
charity  work  (in  Boston)  according  to  what  we  now  know  as 
approved  scientific  methods;  Dorothea  L.  Dix,  the  world's 
greatest  philanthropist  among  women ;  Henry  Berg,  who  in- 
augurated the  work  for  the  suppression  of  cruelty  to  animals ; 
John  Pierpont,  the  fiery  advocate  of  all  reforms,  but  more 


51 

especially  temperance ;  Susan  B.  Anthony,  Mary  A.  Livermore, 
Samuel  J.  May,  names  that  represent  some  of  the  noblest 
efforts  ever  made  for  the  higher  life  of  the  race ;  Henry  W. 
Bellows,  who  was  the  creative  and  presiding  genius  of  the 
Sanitary  Commission ;  Edward  Everett  Hale,  wonderfully  fer- 
tile in  suggestion,  setting  multitudes  at  work  in  many  ways  for 
human  helpfulness.  When  we  add  Dr.  Channing,  who  sowed 
the  seed  from  which  a  world-wide  harvest  of  humanities  has 
ripened,  we  have  ten  in  any  list  of  the  twenty-five  names  of 
the  most  eminent  Americans  belonging  to  this  class.  Nearly 
a  hundredfold  more  than  our  proportion  ! 
.„  No  civic  movement,  in  our  national  history  dur- 

Civii  Service  ing  recent  years,  has  represented  a  higher  moral 
Reform  impulse  or  been  more  beneficial  to  our  political  life 

than  the  reform  of  our  Civil  Service.  The  man  who  started 
this  agitation,  Representative  Jenckes  of  Rhode  Island,  was 
a  Unitarian.  Rev.  Dr.  James  Freeman  Clarke  and  Rev. 
Dr.  Henry  W.  Bellows  (Unitarians)  were  for  a  long  time 
the  only  clergymen  of  prominence  who  gave  this  reform 
earnest  and  untiring  support.  George  William  Curtis  and 
Dorman  B.  Eaton  (both  Unitarians)  shared,  with  Carl  Schurz, 
the  leadership  of  this  great  movement.  The  two  men  who 
were  its  most  valiant  and  powerful  advocates  in  the  Senate  for 
years  were  Hoar  and  Burnside  (Unitarians).  Though  the 
smallest  of  churches,  we  have  played  the  largest  part  in  this 
vital  reformation  of  our  national  life. 

„  In  a  work  just  published,   *'The  Men  who  made 

Statesmen  the  Nation,"  by  Professor  Sparks  of  Chicago  Uni- 
aad  Jurists  yersity,  the  contributions  of  a  dozen  men  to  our 
national  life  are  described.  Of  these,  two  were  definitely 
Unitarian,  — John  Adams  and  Thomas  Jefferson.  Four  others 
held  our  religious  views,  —  Benjamin  Franklin,  Horace  Greeley 
(Universalist),  Daniel  Webster,  and  Abraham  Lincoln,  who, 
though  not  wearing  the  Unitarian  name,  defined  his  religious 
position  in  exactly  the  words  in  which  our  National  Conference 


52 

describes  its  platform  :  Love  to  God  and  love  to  Man.  It  is 
universally  admitted  that  Washington,  though  an  attendant  at 
the  Episcopal  church,  agreed  substantially  with  the  religious 
opinions  of  his  Unitarian  friends,  Adams  and  Jefferson.  Two 
other  Presidents  have  been  Unitarians,  —  John  Quincy  Adams 
and  Millard  Fillmore.  In  the  catalogue  of  distinguished  states- 
men who  have  held  our  faith,  we  find  these,  beside  many  others  : 
Edward  Everett,  Charles  Sumner,  John  C.  Calhoun,  and  the 
great  war  governors  John  A.  Andrew  and  Austin  Blair.  It  is  an 
interesting  and  significant  fact  that  nine  of  the  twenty-eight 
persons  included  in  the  "American  Statesmen  Series" 
(Houghton,  Mifflin,  &  Co.)  were  Unitarians — vastly  more 
than  what  could  reasonably  be  called  our  share. 

Among  jurists  of  highest  national  renown  may  be  mentioned 
Joseph  Story,  Theophilus  Parsons,  Lemuel  Shaw,  Samuel  F. 
Miller,  and  John  Marshall  (the  recent  doubts  raised  in  refer- 
ence to  his  religious  position  on  the  Unitarian  side  are  vague 
and  trivial).  We  have  here  about  a  score  of  prominent 
Americans  who  would  be  included  among  the  hundred  most 
eminent  public  men  in  America.  Many  others,  like  Thomas 
M.  Cooley,  have  held  our  views  though  nominally  connected 
with  other  churches. 

The  mention  of  five  names  will  show  that  we  have 
Religious  not  been  destitute  of  powerful  advocates  of  a  most 
Leaders  spiritual  and  affirmative  Gospel, — William  Ellery 

Channing,  called,  by  Baron  Bunsen,  "  a  prophet  of  the  Christian 
consciousness  of  the  future,"  whose  pages  are  deserving  a  far 
wider  study  than  they  receive  ;  Orville  Dewey,  the  impassioned 
advocate  of  a  most  practical  piety ;  Theodore  Parker,  **  the 
Jupiter  of  the  American  pulpit ;  "  Thomas  Starr  King,  regal  as 
a  king  in  pulpit  power  and  brilliant  as  a  star  in  spiritual  illu- 
mination ;  Frederick  Henry  Hedge,  in  whose  "  Ways  of  the 
Spirit  "  thousands  have  found  peace  and  by  whose  "  Reason  in 
Religion"  thousands  have  been  delivered  from  doubt  and 
superstition.    We  say  it  in  humility,  without  boasting  :  We  have 


53 

'been  only  a  small  handful  of  people,  and  often  accused  of  doing 
nothing  for  the  world,  but  we  are  willing  to  match  these  religious 
teachers,  for  eloquence,  spirituality,  inspiration  to  philanthropy, 
and  general  influence  upon  the  life  of  the  nation,  with  an  equal 

l^V'number  of  men  produced  by  the  largest  churches  in  the  land. 

f  yj.  Unitarians  are  often  condemned  as  cold  and  un- 

Hj'mn  spiritual.     Many  have  lacked  the  gift  of  enthusi- 

"^^^^  asm.     This  defect  is,  however,  probably  more  due 

to  the  New  England  temperament  than  to  the  Unitarian  faith. 
This  form  of  religious  sentiment  cannot,  however,  be  destitute 
of  spirituality,  for  it  has  produced  many  of  the  hymns  most 
popular  in  all  churches.  To  whatever  church  we  may  go,  if  we 
look  into  the  hymn-book  there  used,  we  shall  find  hymns  by 
Sears,  Johnson,  Longfellow  (Samuel),  Chadwick,  Gannett, 
Hosmer,  Furness,  Hedge,  and  others  (to  refer  only  to  Amer- 
ican Unitarians),  —  a  fact  which  reminds  us  that,  while  we  may 
have  opposed  much  in  the  creeds  of  the  other  churches,  we 
have  made  large  contributions  to  their  worship.  This  appeal 
to  the  hynm-books  shows  that  what  we  have  done  to  enrich  the 
songs  of  the  sanctuary  is  far  in  excess  of  our  numerical 
strength.  The  proportion  of  hymns  in  general  use  and 
written  by  Unitarians  is  everywhere  surprisingly  large. 

In  1892  appeared  an  attractive  little  book,  "The  World's 
Best  Hymns,"  by  Prof.  J.  W.  Churchill  of  Andover  Theological 
Seminary,  a  competent  authority  who  would  not,  however,  be 
likely  to  make  a  selection  too  favorable  to  us.  The  author 
presents  nearly  a  hundred  hymns,  ancient  and  modern,  that  he 
considers  most  worthy  of  honor.  Of  those  written  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  about  one-fifth  are  the  works  of  Unitarians, 
some  forty  times  our  proportion,  showing  certainly  a  reason- 
able fruitfulness  in  devotional  poetry. 

Recently  tablets  were  dedicated  in  the  Hall  of  Fame  in 
New  York  City  to  twenty-nine  distinguished  Americans  who 
had  been  selected  for  these  highest  honors  by  the  votes  of  a 
hrg3    and  competent  jury.     Of  this   number,  the   following 


54 

twelve,  or  eighty  times  our  proportion,  were  Unitarians  :   Enier-  i 
son,    Longfellow,   Hawthorne,  Horace    Mann,  Peter  Cooper, 
Channing,  John  Marshall,  Joseph  Story,  John  Adams,  Franklin, 
Jefferson,  and  Webster. 

This  brief  record  of  things  done  for  the  higher  life  of  man, 
the  coQimon  life  of  humanity,  is  not  made  for  self-glorification. 
The  object  has  not  been  to  claim  superiority  over  our  brothers 
in  other  churches.  We  gladly  admit  that  they  can  show  a 
long  line  of  saints  and  heroes.  They,  too,  can  decorate  them- 
selves with  many  illustrious  names. 

Our  sole  purpose  has  been  to  make  it  clear  that  Unitarians 
have  been  reasonably  active  in  good  works ;  and  that  this  faith 
cannot  be  condemned  as  unfruitful.  The  record  proves  that 
we  have  done  a  fair  share  of  the  work  for  the  enrichment  of 
human  life  and  the  amelioration  of  its  miseries.  This  form  of 
faith  has  not  destroyed  the  humanitarian  sentiment  \  rather 
it  has  fostered  philanthropic  efforts  of  every  kind. 

The  record  in  our  behalf  could  easily  be  made  much 
stronger  than  it  has  been  stated.  Wherever  there  are  Unita- 
rians they  are  active  in  all  humanitarian  enterprises.  They 
generally  take  the  initiative  in  many  beautiful  ministries,  like 
the  Flower  Mission,  the  Country  Week,  the  Free  Kindergar- 
ten, the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Animals,  the  Organization 
of  Charity.  Many  activities  have  not  here  been  mentioned, 
and  many  distinguished  laborers  have  not  been  named  for  lack 
of  space.  For  obvious  reasons  chief  attention  has  been  given 
to  past  rather  than  present  worthies. 

In  closing  diis  brief  statement,  one  important  fact  must  be 
made  clear :  Unitarians,  unlike  many  other  religious  people, 
always  work  upon  the  broad  platform  of  universal  humanity. 
We  have  given  most  liberally  to  hospitals,  refuges,  homes  for 
dependents,  and  schools ;  but  this  has  never  been  done  in  a 
sectarian  spirit  or  for  denominational  glory.  We  have  never 
used  our  benefactions  to  advertise  our  creed,  nor  have  we 
limited  our  charities  to  church  lines.      We  have  founded  no 


V 


55 


Unitarian  hospitals.  That  has  not  been  our  ideal  or  method. 
On  this  account  people  in  general  are  often  not  aware  of  what 
we  have  actually  done. 

SLOW   GROWTH 

Sometimes  the  Unitarian  churcji  is  ridiculed  because  it  is  such 
a  small  body,  and  we  are  tauntingly  told  that  our  slow  growth 
proves  that  our  form  of  religion  is  unfitted  for  common  people. 

There  is,  perhaps,  some  dishonor  in  being  so  few  in  number  ; 
and  we  have  undoubtedly  had  some  faults  (deficient  warmth 
and  lack  of  church  enterprise)  that  have  done  something  to 
prevent  a  rapid  growth.  There  is,  however,  nothing  so 
abstruse  in  our  teachings  as  to  place  them  beyond  the  average 
intelligence.  Ours  is  the  plainest  and  simplest  Gospel  any- 
where preached.  It  requires  no  great  effort  of  head  or  heart  to 
understand  our  affirmations.  This  is  fully  proved  by  the  fact 
that  thousands  of  the  common  people  in  all  Protestant  churches 
substantially  believe  with  us  to-day,  as  every  one  is  aware. 

The  chief  obstacle  in  the  way  of  a  wide  acceptance  of  our 
views  in  the  past  has  lain  in  another  direction.  It  is  this  : 
Those  who  come  to  us  have  to  reconstruct  their  religious  opin- 
ions and  ideals.  This  is  always  a  difficult  and  often  a  painful 
process,  —  to  take  down  old  idols  and  set  up  new  ideals.  This 
task  does  require  courage,  patience,  and  thoughtfulness.  To 
get  rid  of  inherited  notions  and  prejudices  is  a  difficult  work, 
more  difficult  than  many  can  perform.  But  this  must  be  done 
first.  And  when  done  the  acceptance  of  our  Gospel  is  an  easy 
gladness.  In  a  wide  experience  of  a  quarter  of  a  century,  both 
among  college  students  and  the  common  people,  this  fact 
stands  out  clear  and  impressive  before  me  :  The  difficulty  in 
winning  people  to  the  Unitarian  position  is  not  inherent  in  our 
doctrines.  It  is  the  dead-hand  of  Tradition.  It  is  easy 
enough  to  explain  our  principles ;  it  is  hard  for  people  to  rid 
themselves  of  prejudice  and  superstition. 


56 

But  in  a  general  way  Unitarians  have  reaped  as  they  have 
sown.  We  have  grown  slowly  as  a  denomination  because  we 
have  not  sown  sectarianism.  We  have  exerted  an  influence 
out  of  all  proportion  to  our  numbers,  as  the  facts  in  the  pre- 
ceding pages  demonstrate ;  and  we  have  done  this  because  we 
have  striven  to  enrich  the  general  life  of  humanity.  We  have 
had  missionary  zeal,  but  it  has  run  to  nation- making  rather 
than  church-organization.  Unitarians  have  elected  this  larger 
service,  not  because  indifferent  to  the  church  and  destitute  of 
love  for  religion,  but  because  they  saw  so  many  other  things  to 
do  that  seemed  more  important  than  changing"  a  man's  theo- 
logical opinion,  and  also  because  they  have  never  taken  a  nar- 
row view  of  the  church  as  the  only  agent  of  salvation.  They 
have  loved  religion,  but  they  have  loved  it  as  something  larger 
and  deeper  than  dogmatic  belief  or  ecclesiastical  machinery. 

If  the  energies  that  have  gone  into  literature,  education,  and 
reform  (giving  us  a  harvest  in  these  directions  far  in  excess  of 
what  could  be  expected  of  us)  had  been  applied  to  church 
extension,  we  should,  as  Jefferson  predicted,  have  become  one 
of  the  large  religious  bodies  in  the  land.  But  these  energies 
could  not  work  in  both  directions.  Our  people  were  not  idle, 
but  their  service  was  humanitarian  rather  than  ecclesiastical. 
Therefore  we  must  be  judged  by  what  we  did  in  our  own  line, 
not  by  what  we  failed  to  do  along  the  line  of  ambition  so  often 
followed  by  other  churches.  In  the  very  nature  of  the  case, 
a  body  suspicious  of  sectarianism  and  concerned  about 
humanity  in  general,  could  not  do  great  things  as  a  sect. 

The  truth  is,  Unitarians  chose  to  do  a  national  rather  than 
a  denominational  work,  and  they  must  be  judged  accordingly. 
While  others  were  out  on  the  frontier  organizing  churches,  our 
best  minds  were  writing  the  books  that  have  enriched  the 
homes  and  filled  the  libraries  of  that  frontier.  While  others 
were  giving  their  money  to  church  enterprises,  our  rich  men, 
like  Amos  and  Abbott  Lawrence,  were  giving  their  fortunes  to 
help   all   other   enterprises    except   Unitarian   missions,  even 


f 


57 

endowing  Orthodox  colleges  !  This  was,  perhaps,  a  mistake, 
but  it  was  not  done  because  they  had  no  interest  in  their  own 
church.  It  was  because  they  saw  so  much  to  appreciate  in  all 
the  churches ;  and  also  they  felt  that  there  was  something 
more  necessary  in  the  world  than  to  force  their  personal  theo- 
logical opinions  upon  others. 

While  the  laymen  of  other  churches  were  laboring  heroically 
to  extend  their  particular  Zion,  ours,  like  Dorman  B.  Eaton 
and  George  William  Curtis,  were  using  all  their  energies  to 
reform  the  Civil  Service.  Both  kinds  of  work  were  needed, 
and  the  larger  churches  have  done  both  ;  but  we  gave  ourselves 
so  exclusively  (perhaps  unwisely)  to  these  civic  and  humani- 
tarian enterprises  that  little  or  no  energy  was  left  for  church 
extension.  And  just  because  of  this  fact  we  are  able  to  show 
a  large  surplus  of  national  enrichment  to  our  credit. 

Suppose,  for  example,  that  Theodore  Parker  had  used  his 
splendid  powers  and  vast  enthusiasm  to  build  up  a  denomina- 
tion, as  did  Alexander  Campbell.  To-day  we  should  have 
Unitarian  churches  by  the  thousand  instead  of  the  hundred. 
But  he  worked  for  other  objects  :  for  the  freedom  of  the  slave 
and  for  the  intellectual  and  spiritual  quickening  of  America. 
He  practically  sent  out  none  to  found  churches ;  instead  he 
planted  our  land  everywhere  with  young  men  and  women  who 
have  been  leaders  in  every  philanthropic,  educational,  and  re- 
formatory movement.     This  certainly  was  worth  doing. 

Peter  Cartwright  sowed  the  Mississippi  Valley  with  Metho- 
dist churches.  This  was  a  magnificent  work.  Thomas  Starr 
King  might  have  planted  the  seed  on  the  Pacific  coast  from 
which  hundreds  of  Unitarian  churches  would  have  grown. 
Instead  he  saved  California  to  the  Union  cause.  It  was 
better  so.  The  great  enthusiasm  of  Rev.  Dr.  Henry  W. 
Bellows,  if  devoted  exclusively  to  church  affairs,  would  per- 
haps have  increased  our  denomination  as  fast,  proportion- 
ately, as  Bishop  Simpson  enlarged  the  bounds  of  Methodism. 
But  he.  gave  himself  to  the  Sanitary  Commission  and  helped 


58 

as  much  as  any  general  to  save  the  Union.  This  was  worth 
more  than  a  thousand  new  Unitarian  churches.  Thus  we  see 
that  the  chief  reason  for  our  slow  growth  as  a  sect  is  in  many 
ways  creditable  to  the  Unitarians  themselves. 

But  our  growth  as  a  church  has  not  been  as  slow  in  recent 
years  as  many  suppose.  In  the  score  of  years  from  1880  to 
1900  the  Unitarian  churches  in  America  increased  35  per  cent, 
nearly  as  fast  as  the  growth  in  population,  —  a  ratio  that  com- 
pares very  favorably  with  that  of  the  larger  churches.  In  the 
same  period  the  contributions  to  the  American  Unitarian 
Association  for  missionary  purposes  have  doubled.  The  activ- 
ities of  the  Woman's  Alliance,  of  the  Sunday  School  Society, 
and  the  Post  Office  Mission  in  the  free  distribution  of  religious 
literature. are  probably  over  four  times  as  great  to-day  as  they 
were  in  1880. 

But  the  chief  growth  of  the  Unitarian  faith  has  been  within 
what  are  called  the  Orthodox  churches.  The  leading  thoughts 
of  Channing  are  preached  every  Sunday  morning  in  thousands 
of  pulpits  that  are  not  Unitarian  in  name.  The  views  of 
Parker,  Hedge,  and  Clarke  are  substantially  accepted  by 
hundreds  of  the  progressive  ministers  in  all  the  Protestant 
denominations.  Hardly  a  remnant  of  the  old  Orthodoxy  is 
left  in  any  prominent  city  pulpit.  It  still  stands  written  in  the 
creeds,  but  it  has  little  or  no  part  in  the  vital  convictions  of 
intelligent  people.  In  the  religious  newspapers  of  the  land, 
what  have  passed  as  commonplaces  among  us  for  years  are 
constantly  set  forth  as  discoveries.  Frequently  an  editorial  full 
of  Unitarianism  stands  side  by  side  with  a  condemnation  of  the 
Unitarian  church  1  Everywhere  people  boast  of  their  liberality 
and  their  indifference  to  creeds,  —  admirable  when  done  with 
sincerity.  We,  as  a  church,  are  not  responsible  for  all  of  this, 
though  we  have  done  our  part  to  bring  it  about.  It  is  due 
largely  to  the  "  Time-Spirit."  This  way  of  thinking  and  feeling 
in  religion-  is  now  abroad  in  the  land.  So  that,  while  our 
church  grows  slowly,  our  ideal  is  becoming  victorious. 


/  On  this  account  some  carelessly  say :  The  work  of  the 
Unitarian  church  is  done  !  Yes,  indeed,  if  its  work  was  ever 
simply  to  destroy  Orthodoxy  as  a  creed  j  for  the  old  Ortho- 
doxy as  a  method  and  system  of  thought  is  dead.  But  no  true 
Unitarian  ever  so  understood  or  described  the  Unitarian  mis- 
sion. The  task  of  the  Unitarian  church  has  been  something 
infinitely  larger  and  vastly  nobler  —  the  cultivation  of  a  rational 
and  spiritual  form  of  piety  for  the  enlargement  of  humanity 
in  general.  From  this  point  of  view,  the  Unitarian  church  was 
never  more  needed  than  to-day.  The  growing  liberality  of 
other  churches  no  more  ends  our  mission  than  does  the 
growing  enlightenment  of  the  community  make  the  doctor 
unnecessary.  The  need  was  never  greater  than  at  present  for 
agencies  of  ethical  quickening  and  spiritual  training.  The 
enemy  to  be  fought  is  not  dogmatism  but  worldliness.  We 
must  use  our  freedom  to  establish  the  noblest  ideals  in  society 
and  in  politics. 

OUR   SUPREME   ASPIRATION 

_  The  Unitarian  strives  to  represent  and  embody  in 

Hew  personal  character  and  civic  institution,  the  New 

C  stianity  Christianity  which  is  rising  all  about  us  and  which 
is  the  simple  but  mighty  gospel  of  Jesus,  enriched  by  science 
and  democracy,  enforced  by  the  philanthropic  impulse,  and 
operated  through  the  educational  method.  It  puts  character- 
building  above  creed-making,  deeds  of  love  above  dogmas 
of  wrath,  service  above  sacrament,  obedience  to  moral  law 
above  belief  in  theological  statements.  It  makes  the  Golden 
Rule  central.  It  uses  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  rather  than 
the  Nicene  creed  as  the  chart  of  life.  It  appeals  to  love 
instead  of  fear.  It  encourages  growth  and  discovery  rather 
than  conformity  of  opinion.  It  pleads  for  brotherhood  and 
co-operation.  It  insists  on  freedom.  It  uses  the  Bible,  not 
to  make  a  creed,  but  to  enrich  the  life. 


6o 

The  New  Christianity  finds  the  service  of  God  in  helpfulness 
to  man,  the  way  to  heaven  in  the  path  of  righteousness,  the 
sure  salvation  in  perfected  manhood,  the  only  authority  in  love 
and  reason,  an  adequate  basis  of  religious  organization  in  a 
common  purpose  to  be  good,  and  to  do  good  :  all  truth  its 
scripture,  all  men  its  field  and  fellowship,  all  loving  souls  its 
saints  and  ministers,  a  kingdom  of  heaven  for  all  on  earth  its 
ideal  and  aspiration. 

We  strive  to  make  the  Unitarian  church  the  efficient 
Unitarian  agent  and  organic  expression  of  the  New  Christian- 
Churcli  -j-y^     y^Q  pour    into    its  worship  the  warmth  and 

gladness  of  an  impassioned  love  for  God,  the  Father  of  all. 
We  keep  our  hymns  and  prayers  free  from  selfish  importunity, 
offensive  exhortation,  and  doctrinal  discussion.  We  make 
them  the  simple  but  earnest  outpouring  of  trustful  hearts, 
wholly  intent  on  personal  communion  with  our  Creator. 
We  would  shun  the  trivial  speech  and  flippant  spirit 
that  destroy  true  reverence.  We  would  be  free  from  the 
mournful  tone  and  affected  gravity  that  spread  gloom  without 
bringing  solemnity.  We  would  cultivate  the  dignity  and  the 
enthusiasm  of  a  saintly  but  joyous  piety.  We  would  make  our 
worship  so  catholic,  so  tender,  so  vital,  that  all,  of  whatever 
theological  opinion,  may  feel  themselves  at  ''  the  east  window 
of  divine  surprise."  Then  tears  shall  cease,  burdens  shall 
fall,  and  the  ecstasy  of  pure  devotion  shall  fill  the  soul. 

In  the  pulpit  of  this  church  stands  a  teacher  of  sacred  things 
to  speak  with  absolute  sincerity,  with  perfect  freedom,  and 
with  forceful  conviction.  He  will  affirm  more  than  he 
will  deny,  using  most  often  words  of  comfort  and  of  cheer. 
The  pulpit  is  a  watch-tower  from  which  he  scans  the  outer 
heavens  and  reports  all  discoveries  that  bear  upon  conduct. 
To  it  he  fetches  out  of  the  depths  of  his  heart,  and  applies  to 
others  for  constraint  and  inspiration,  all  the  spiritual  and 
spiritualizing  truths  of  his  own  experience.  He  uses  all  facts 
so  far  as  he  can  make  them  into  a  gospel.     He  is  a  teacher. 


6i 

but  a  teacher  of  right  living,  not  intent  on  making  converts  to 
a  creed,  but  anxious  only  that  his  message  carry  repentance  to 
sinners,  hope  to  the  sad,  and  comfort  to  the  suffering,  as  well 
as  joy  and  inspiration  to  the  strong  and  courageous.  He 
administers  the  spirit  of  Jesus  to  enrich  and  ennoble  human 
life.  He  tells  that  wonderful  story  to  make  men  strong,  pure, 
forgiving,  and  loving.  He  uses  the  Bible  to  make  powerful  in 
human  affairs  its  great  lesson  of  righteousness,  —  the  right- 
eousness of  the  heart  that  brings  peace. 

We  insist  that  the  church  is  a  precious  and  paramount  insti- 
tution, because  human  nature  is  essentially  religious.  Religion 
is  not  only  an  important  part  of  life,  it  is  a  part  that  needs 
wise  and  careful  training.  Therefore,  those  who  neglect  the 
church  neglect  what  is  highest  in  themselves  and  most  useful 
to  civilization.  Indifference  to  religious  nurture  and  church 
service  is  indifference  to  our  humanity  proper.  The  great 
spiritual  gifts  and  graces,  to  cultivate  which  is  the  task  of  the 
church,  are  no  more  likely  to  spring  up  in  us  spontaneously 
than  the  mastery  of  a  musical  instrument  or  the  command  of  a 
foreign  tongue.  If  we  are  to  gather  the  harvest,  we  must 
plant  the  seed  and  cultivate  the  soil. 

We  cannot  have  the  beauty  and  serenity  of  life  in  home  and 
neighborhood  that  are  bound  up  with  the  Sabbath,  unless  we 
maintain  the  religious  uses  of  this  day  of  rest.  And  we  make 
the  best  use  of  Sunday  only  when  we  use  it  to  expand  what  is 
best  within  us,  and  spend  its  hours  in  a  manner  radically  differ- 
ent than  we  do  the  other  days  of  the  week.  We  cannot  possess 
and  preserve  the  great  moral  and  spiritual  convictions  and 
enthusiasms  which  make  for  peace  and  righteousness,  unless  we 
loyally  support  this  institution — the  church  —  created  for  the 
development  of  the  religious  life  and  consecrated  to  the 
service  of  the  highest  and  noblest  interests  of  the  human  race. 

The  neglect  of  the  religious  training  of  children  is  not  only 
an  injury  to  them  but  a  sin  against  civilization.  We  are  under 
a  heavier  obligation  to  give  our  children  the  best  religion  that 


62 

we  have  found  than  we  are  to  have  them  correctly  taught  in 
music  or  mathematics. 

^  Out  of  this  church,  ahve  with  various  educational 

The  and  philanthropic  activities,  all  imbued  with  the 

uStarian  religious  purpose  and  devoted  to  religious  ends, 
we  strive  to  send  forth  into  the  world  to 
be  a  part  of  its  best  life  the  real  Unitarian,  a  man  who 
demands  freedom  for  himself  and  grants  the  same  liberty 
to  his  neighbor;  who  bestows  his  love  broadly  regardless 
of  sect,  fellowships  all  seekers  for  the  truth,  and  labors  for 
man  on  account  of  his  need  rather  than  his  creed ;  who  fol- 
lows reason  as  the  authority  for  truth  and  conscience  as  the 
guide  to  conduct,  allowing  no  text  or  tradition  to  bhnd  the  eye 
or  enslave  the  heart,  and  always  striving  to  be  wiser  to-day 
than  yesterday  and  better  to-morrow  than  to-day. 

The  real  Unitarian  is  one  who  believes  that  it  is  diviner  to 
do  a  deed  of  love  than  to  subscribe  to  any  form  of  doctrine ; 
who  holds  that  religion  is  spiritual  worship,  personal  righteous- 
ness, and  helpful  service ;  and  who.  learns  from  Jesus  to  be 
forgiving,  merciful,  and  useful. 
•  The  real  Unitarian  is  one  who  sees  the  universe  under  a  law 
that  is  love,  finds  nature  interwoven  with  Fatherhood,  and 
beholds  God  immanent  in  all  souls;  who  traces  the  divine 
revelation  in  all  discoveries  of  truth ;  and  who  has  faith  that 
Providence  embraces  humanity,  and  that  all  wanderers  will 
some  day  find  their  way  home  to  the  Infinite  Goodness. 

And  these  great  root-truths  and  imperial  sentiments,  so 
widely  shared  in  varying  measures  by  others,  being  no  mo- 
nopoly of  ours,  will  help  us  all  to  march  forward  through  life, 
serene  under  abuse,  patient  in  disappointments,  heroic  in  dan- 
ger, victorious  in  temptation,  helpful  with  love  and  cheerful 
with  hope  in  our  little  corner,  feeling  that  the  dear  God  is  our 
Father,  and  that  beyond  the  grave  lies  in  immortal  light  and 
blessedness  the  household  of  our  affections. 


63 


APPENDIX 

LITERATURE 

The  following  works  are  historical,  and  they  tell  the  story  of 
the  Unitarian  movement : 

I.  A  Short  History  of  Unitarianism  since  the  Reformation.  $0.50. 
Rev.  Frederick  B.  Mott. 
II.  Unitarianism  since  the  Reformation.     254  pp.  1.50. 

Rev.  Joseph  Henry  Allen,  D.D. 

III.  Old  and  New  Unitarian  Belief.     246pp.  1. 50. 

Rev.  John  W.  Chadwick. 

IV.  Unitarianism:  Origin  and  History.     400  pp.  1. 00. 

Lectures  by  Sixteen  Eminent  Unitarians. 
V.  Heads  of  English  Unitarian  History.     138  pp.  .60. 

Rev.  Alexander  Gordon. 
VI.  A  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Rise  and  Progress  of  the 

Unitarian  Christian  Doctrine  in  Modern  Times.  .10. 

The  Unitarian  Affirmations  respecting  religion  are  fully  de- 
scribed in  these  books,  —  that  by  Channing  is  especially  rich 
in  other  directions : 

I.  Channing,  Works.     I  vol.     1060  pp.  $1.00. 

II.  Parker,  Views  of  Religion:  Selections.   I  vol.    466  pp.  i. 00. 

III.  Dewey,  Works,     i  vol.     804  pp.  ^•^'^* 

IV.  Our  Unitarian  Gospel.     282  pp.  i.oo. 

Rev.  Minot  J.  Savage,  D.D. 
V.  The  Power  and  Promise  of  the  Liberal  Faith.   145  pp.      .75. 
Rev.  Thomas  R.  Slicer. 
VI.  Positive  Aspects  of  Unitarian  Christianity.      274  pp.       .ys- 
By  English  Writers  with  Introduction  by  Dr.  Martineau. 
VII.  Forward  Movement  Lectures.     99  pp.  -40. 

Rev.  Brooke  Herford,  D.D. 


^4 

These  books  can  be  ordered  from  the  American  Unitarian 
Association,  25  Beacon  St.,  Boston,  Mass.,  and  to  this  body 
may  also  be  addressed  inquiries  in  regard  to  Unitarian  work 
and  organization. 

The  following  pamphlets  (from  16  to  40  pp.)  give  the  views 
commonly  held  by  Unitarians  upon  the  subjects  of  which  they 
treat,  and  they  are  sent  free  on  application  to  the  American 
Unitarian  Association,  Boston,  Mass. : 

(i)  The  Faith  of  a  Free  Church  :  Rev.  S.  M.  Crothers,  D.D.    . 

(2)  What  do  Unitarians  Believe  ?     Rev.  Charles  W.  Wendt^. . 

(3)  Unitarianism.     Rev.  Rush  R.  Shippen. 

(4)  Our  Gospel.     Rev..  M.  J.  Savage,  D.D. 

(5)  Unitarian  Principles.     Rev.  Edward  Everett  Hale,  D.D. 

(6)  The  Main  Lines  of  Religion  as  held  by  Unitarians.  By 
Rev.  Brooke  Herford,  D.D. 

(7)  Unitarianism  :  it  is  a  Positive  Faith,  and  rightly  claims  our 
Loyalty.     By  Rev.  Minot  J.  Savage,  D.D. 

(8)  The  Church  of  the  Spirit.  By  Rev.  Francis  G.  Peabody,  D.D. 

(9)  God  .  .  .  Rev.  Samuel  R.  Calthrop,  LL.D. 
(10)  The  Real  Jesus.     Rev.  Howard  N.  Brown. 
(ri)  The  Bible  in  Theology.     Rev.  W.  W.  Fenn. 

(12)  The  Immortal  Hope.     Rev.  John  W.  Chadwick. 

(13)  The  Theology  of  Unitarians.    Rev.  Charles  C.  Everett,  D.D. 

(14)  Incarnation.     Rev.  William  C.  Gannett. 

(15)  Eternal  Punishment.     Rev.  Thomas  Starr  King. 


bTNAUust,  -  ii:t. 

PAT.  JAN.  tl,  ISO* 


'rincfton  ThMioaical  SonindrySpfrr  Library 


012  01152  6888 


Date  Due 

"^--^^-^ 

AP^i^^^b^ 

riifr**^***^. 

. 

"^H^^^^j 

\ 

1 

9/ 

f 

iii_'i_;_,u* '  "^ 

-^««^^' 

i 

f) 

